Agnosticism, Atheism, Bible Study, Christianity, Faith, God, Morality, Religion, Truth

Letter to Kathy (the Bible Has Problems)

Dear Kathy,

Since you graciously agreed (in our recent conversation) to let me present you with some examples of the Bible’s problems, I decided to do it in this way so it would have its own comment thread. As I’ve said, when I was a Christian, one strike against the Bible was not enough to shake my faith — maybe it only seemed problematic, maybe there was an explanation we hadn’t uncovered yet, maybe the historical accounts were wrong, etc. But as the problems began to mount up, I reached a point where I could no longer deny the fact that the Bible had actual errors.

A couple of suggestions before we begin. Try to be as open-minded about this as possible. As you go through these examples, ask yourself if God would allow such problems to exist in a message that he wanted all people to accept and believe? According to the Bible, whenever God sent someone a message, whether it was Pharaoh or Gideon or Nebuchadnezzar or Paul, they had no question whom it was from. They didn’t always follow it, as we see with people like Pharaoh and Solomon, but they didn’t question the source of the message or what it stated. So why would God operate differently today? Why would he want us to be so confused about his message that we’re able to question whether or not it’s really from him?

Another thing to keep in mind is that even if you come to the conclusion that the Bible has actual problems, that doesn’t mean you have to stop believing in God. There are a number of Christians who don’t believe in inerrancy. And even if you lose faith in the Christian god, that still doesn’t mean you have to stop believing in God. A number of people, including several of our founding fathers, were deists. I have a lot of sympathy for that view and plan to do a post on it soon.

Some of the items listed here will have links that provide additional information, especially when the issue is too detailed to list here. I hope that you’ll check out those links, since some of them are quite significant points. And regardless of how this article strikes you, I hope it will help serve as a great springboard to launch you into your own research.

Some of the Problems

Creation
The creation accounts in Genesis do not match what we’ve learned through science. This isn’t shocking news, but it bears looking into. Evolution and the Big Bang Theory had nothing to do with my deconversion, but I’ve learned more about both since leaving Christianity. It’s shocking how much misinformation I had been operating under. Not to say that all Christians are that way — that was simply my experience. But the evidence for both evolution and the Big Bang are far more substantial than I had ever realized. Two good resources for learning more about these issues are the following (though I’d also recommend checking out the recent Cosmos series, as well as some of the PBS NOVA specials):

Marco’s Daddy and the Beginning of Life on Earth


http://talkorigins.org/

Another problem with the creation accounts is that Genesis 1 says that plants and trees were made on the 3rd day, while man was made on the 6th. But Genesis 2:5-9 says that man was created before there were any plants or trees in the land. Also, the 1st chapter says that man was created after all the animals, but the 2nd chapter implies that it was the other way around. It seems strange that such discrepancies would exist only a chapter apart, but there are a number of textual clues that suggest the first 5 books of the Bible were assembled over a long period of time from various writings written by a number of different people. Many scholars believe that Genesis 1 and 2 represent two separate versions of the creation story that were both included because the compilers didn’t know which was more accurate. Whatever the reason, there’s no question that the differences exist and are hard to explain.

10 Plagues
During the 10 plagues, God afflicts all of Egypt’s livestock with a disease (Ex 9:1-7), and it specifies that it would affect the “horses, the donkeys, the camels, the herds, and the flocks.” We’re told that all of Egypt’s livestock died. But the later plague of boils was said to affect both man and beast (verse 10 of chapter 9). Maybe it meant non-livestock animals. But Ex 11:5 says that the death of the firstborn would also affect Egypt’s cattle, and in Exodus 14, Pharaoh pursues the Israelites with horses.

Hares Chew the Cud
Leviticus 11:6 tells us that hares chew the cud. They do not. Animals that chew the cud are called ruminants. When they eat plant matter, it goes to their first stomach to soften, and then it’s regurgitated to their mouth. They spend time re-chewing it, and then it is swallowed and fully digested. Ruminants (cows, sheep, goats, etc.) are recognizable because their chewing of the cud is very obvious. Hares (rabbits) don’t chew the cud; however, their mouths do move frequently, so it’s possible to see why some people may have assumed that they do chew the cud. Of course, God would know they didn’t, and this is why the passage is problematic. You can read more about this here.

Arphaxad
In the genealogy given in Genesis 11:10-12, we see that Noah fathered Shem and Shem fathered Arphaxad. At the age of 35, Arphaxad fathered Shelah. This information is confirmed in 1 Chron 1:18. But Luke 3:35-36 tells us that Arphaxad’s son was Cainan, and he was the father of Shelah.

Where does Luke get this information? It disagrees with the Old Testament, so who should we believe? Some have suggested that Genesis and 1 Chronicles simply left out Cainan for some reason. But why would they do that? To further complicate it, how could Cainan have fit in there? Genesis tells us that Arphaxad was 35 when he fathered Shelah. Does it really seem likely that Arphaxad became a grandfather by 35, especially when you consider the extreme old ages that people lived to at that time?

Another explanation is that some copyist messed up when copying Luke and Cainan is just a mistake. But this is not much better. First of all, the error would have needed to occur early for it to be in all our copies of Luke. Secondly, are we really comfortable saying that we have the inspired word of our creator, but it got messed up by some guy who wasn’t paying close attention? To me, that doesn’t lend a lot of credence to the idea of inspiration or inerrancy.

Instead, the most likely explanation is that Luke made a mistake. This, of course, would indicate that he was not inspired.

Problems in the Book of Daniel
In Daniel 5, the writer refers to Belshazzar as the son of Nebuchadnezzar 7 different times. Yet we know from multiple contemporary sources that Belshazzar’s father was Nabonidus, who was not related to Nebuchadnezzar. The same chapter says that Darius the Mede took over Babylon, but this person does not seem to have ever existed. Daniel says that he was the son of Ahaseurus, and in mentioning this, the author of Daniel indicates that he was thinking of a later ruler — the persian emperor Darius the Great, whose son was Ahaseurus. This post in particular goes into the problems surrounding the 5th chapter, but if you’d like to learn about the problems in the rest of the book, you can access each article in the series here.

Jairus’s Daughter
In Mark 5:23, Jairus finds Jesus and says that his daughter is at the point of death. While they’re on their way to the house, some of his servants find them on the way and say that she has died and there’s no point in troubling Jesus further.

However, in Matthew 9:18, Jairus already knows that his daughter has died, but tells Jesus that if he’ll lay his hands on her, she’ll live. This may seem like a minor difference, but honestly, there’s only one scenario that could be true. Either the girl was already dead, or she wasn’t. And if Jairus already knew she was dead, then there was no point in his servants coming to tell him that (so of course, they don’t appear in Matthew’s account).

The Centurion
This is similar to the previous issue. Matthew and Luke both record a centurion who asks Jesus to heal his sick servant. Matthew 8:5-13 says that the centurion himself comes before Jesus to ask for help. Luke 7:1-10 says that the Jewish elders went on his behalf, and then he sent servants to follow up. In Luke, Jesus never speaks to, or even sees, the centurion at all.

Hight Priest
In Mark 2:23-28, Jesus talks about the occasion from the Old Testament when David ate the showbread, which Jesus said was in the days of Abiathar the high priest. However, in 1 Samuel 21:1-6, it appears that Ahimelech was the high priest. Some have tried to answer this problem by saying that Abiathar was alive during that particular episode, so Jesus’ statement is still true. But that’s obviously not the intent of the passage. After all, we would correct anyone who said that the tragedy of 9/11 occurred during the days of President Barack Obama. He may have been alive at the time, but that event did not happen while he was President.

430 Years
Galatians 3:16-17 says this:

The promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. The Scripture does not say “and to seeds,” meaning many people, but “and to your seed,” meaning one person, who is Christ. What I mean is this: The law, introduced 430 years later, does not set aside the covenant previously established by God and thus do away with the promise.

Here, Paul says that the law came 430 years after the promises were made to Abraham. But in Exodus 12:40-41, we see:

Now the length of time the Israelite people lived in Egypt was 430 years. At the end of the 430 years, to the very day, all the LORD’s divisions left Egypt.

If the Israelites were in Egypt 430 years, then there could not have been 430 years between Abraham’s promises and the law. God made the promises to Abraham in Genesis 12:1-3, and as we read on through Genesis, we see that Abraham had no children at this time. Later, he had a son named Isaac. When Isaac was 60 years old, he had Jacob (Gen 25:24-26), and Jacob had 12 sons that produced the 12 tribes of Israel. Already, we can see that some time has passed since Abraham received the promise. Once Jacob’s sons were all grown with families of their own, they finally settled in Egypt. Jacob was 130 years old at this time (Gen 47:9), and this marks the beginning of that 430 year period that the Israelites spent in Egypt.

That means that the time between the promise to Abraham and the giving of the law was actually over 600 years. So why did Paul say 430 years? I think it’s obvious that this was a simple mistake. He remembered the 430 year figure because that’s how much time the Israelites spent in Egypt, and so he simply misspoke. It’s not a big deal… except that he’s supposed to be inspired by God.

Jesus’ Birth
There are a number of issues surrounding Jesus’ birth. First, Matthew’s and Luke’s accounts contradict one another on virtually all the details, which you can read about here. Secondly, Matthew seems to invent an episode where Herod kills all the children in Bethlehem who are 2 and under, causing Mary, Joseph, and Jesus to flee to Egypt (instead of just returning home to Nazareth, because only Luke says that they started in Nazareth). Matthew does this in order to “fulfill” some Old Testament passages that actually have nothing to do with Jesus or killing babies. You can read about Matthew’s misuse of the Old Testament here — it’s quite blatant.

The Virgin Birth is one of the most famous aspects of Jesus’ story, and it was supposedly done in fulfillment of a prophecy from Isaiah. But it turns out that Isaiah was prophesying no such thing — he was talking about an event that was happening in his own time, and Matthew (once again) just appropriated the “prophecy” for his own devices. You can read all the details here.

Another problem concerning Jesus’ birth narratives is that Matthew and Luke both offer genealogies for Jesus, but they are completely different from one another. Worse, they don’t match the genealogies listed in the Old Testament, either. And Matthew claims that there was a pattern in the number of generations between Abraham and David, between David and the Babylonian captivity, and between the Babylonian captivity and Christ. But to get this neat division, he is forced to leave out some names. In other words, that pattern didn’t happen. You can read more about that here.

The Triumphal Entry
While not as blatant as most of these other issues, when Matthew recounts Jesus’ triumphal entry into Jerusalem, he once again borrows from the Old Testament, but seems to make a mistake in his implementation. See here for more info.

Judas’ Death
Judas is well known for being the disciple that betrayed Jesus, but what’s not as well known is there are two different accounts of his death, and it’s very hard to reconcile them. According to Matthew, Judas threw his money down at the chief priests’ feet and went out and hanged himself. We’re not told where he did this. The priests then take the money, and instead of putting it back in the treasury (since it’s blood money), they buy a field to use for burying strangers. Because they bought the field with this money, it’s called the “Field of Blood.”

According to Acts, Judas bought a field with his money (we’re not told that he was remorseful), and he somehow fell down, bursting open in the middle and bleeding to death. The field was called “Field of Blood” after that because of the manner in which Judas died.

To make things more complicated, Matthew (of course) says that this happened in accordance with Jeremiah’s prophecy, but there’s nothing in Jeremiah that matches up. The closest reference comes from Zechariah, not Jeremiah.

These issues really complicate the notion of divine inspiration, and you can read more about them here.

The Crucifixion
There are several big problems with the way the gospels record the events of Jesus’ death, including the fact that different times of day are given for it, and even different days altogether. You can read more about this here.

The Resurrection
There are also a number of problems concerning the resurrection, some minor, some major. They’re too involved to get into here, but you can read all about them here and here.

The Problem of Hell
The notion of Hell is fraught with problems. It might even surprise you to learn that the Bible’s teachings on the afterlife change dramatically between the Old and New Testaments. I go into detail about Hell’s problems here, here, and here.

The Problem of Evil
Another huge problem for Christianity is the problem of evil, which I talk about here. This post also addresses the “problem of Heaven.”

The Bible’s Morality
While a number of people believe that the Christian god is the source of all morality, the Bible is actually filled with some monstrous acts that are either commanded by God, done with his consent, or carried out by him directly. I talk about some specific examples here, and I address some of the common responses to them here.

Conclusion

Kathy, there are a number of other examples that could be given, including the prophecy of Tyre that we’ve been discussing. But to me, these are some of the most significant and clear-cut problems. We could try to manufacture explanations for every one of these — some might be more believable than others. But why should we have to? If a perfect God inspired this book, why should it contain so many discrepancies? And honestly, some of these issues can’t be explained. They’re just wrong. The problems go well beyond internal contradictions and unfulfilled prophecies. There are problems of authorship, problems with the doctrines, and problems with the way the texts were written, transcribed, and compiled.

I’m sure you’ve spent your time as a Christian trying to reach those who are lost. You’ve always believed that Christianity is truth, and it’s the one thing that everyone needs. But could it be that Christianity is just as false as every other religion in the world? And if that’s the case, wouldn’t you want to leave it behind? When one is dedicated to finding truth, they have to be prepared to follow it wherever it leads. It’s not always easy or popular. It’s not even a guarantee that you’re right. All it means is that you follow the evidence where it leads to the best of your ability. If you find out that you’re wrong about something, you adjust course when the evidence dictates. If God exists, and if he’s righteous, what more could he ask for than that? I’ll close with my favorite quote:

Live a good life. If there are gods and they are just, then they will not care how devout you have been, but will welcome you based on the virtues you have lived by. If there are gods, but unjust, then you should not want to worship them. If there are no gods, then you will be gone, but will have lived a noble life that will live on in the memories of your loved ones.
— Marcus Aurelius

1,782 thoughts on “Letter to Kathy (the Bible Has Problems)”

  1. @Kathy,

    I see no valid excuses for claiming God doesn’t exist.. none. My judgments are just. If anyone can convince me that I am wrong.. I’ll apologize.. but not before.

    Exactly. The fact that you believe as ardently as you do means that no matter how much evidence anyone might have wouldn’t convince you that you’re wrong.

    Like

  2. Nate and Mike,

    Thanks for your feedback, and your expansion on the topic of Hell….

    As morbid as that sounds 🙂

    I am familiar with what you are saying regarding Gehenna and Hades.

    Although there are still these passages to consider:

    Matthew 8:11-12.
    Matthew 13:42
    Matthew 22:12-13
    Matthew 25:29-30
    Luke 13:27-28

    The weeping and gnashing of teeth that Jesus refers to suggests to me that people He is referring to are concious, conflicted and separated and in some kind of torment…

    These verses are in there, perhaps I’m misunderstanding them… but if I’m going to read it, I shouldn’t ignore passages. And like I said, these passages don’t sit well with me to be honest.

    Not a nice topic I know…

    Like

  3. “that, of course, includes the little children who were slaughtered and the pregnant women whose bellies were slit open, and of course – last, but not least – the unborn babies – you know, the ones you condemn abortionists for killing – who were ripped from the slit womb. Enemies of your god, all. Right?”

    Sure if God knew that killing their parents would lead them to rebel against God and be an issue. Got a problem withit arch then answer my Hitler analogy without spittle and then tell me you know what God didn’t know. Your incredulity means nothing to me. Against you is the fact that God didn’t call for it across the board with everyone conquered but with a particular set he knew well.

    Like

  4. @Mike,

    I don’t think anyone here was using the fact that people leave the faith as evidence that there’s something wrong with Christianity. I don’t think…. I certainly wasn’t. Kathy was just saying she didn’t see how people went from steadfastly believing to not believing in such a turnabout.

    One thing that I would say is that it certainly wasn’t a “turnabout” for me. It didn’t happen overnight. I didn’t just wake up one day and decide I didn’t believe anymore.

    Like

  5. Yes Mike as usual you opened your mouth before reading her comments. Kathy said, “Ok, so you once considered yourself a sincere Christian.. so my question would be the same to you as it was to Ruth.. what could have possible happened to make you no longer a believer? ” (though not directed to me)

    This is why I suggested Kathy read Charles Templeton’s book which would be MY answer to her question.

    Like

  6. a sociopath taking the lives of innocent people” – Ah, OK, you mean like Joshua murdering the Caananites – gotcha!

    Like

  7. Actually no, Mike. Only 2 people from this blog wrote a review. And one comment is from a very devoted Christian who was willing to look beyond the stained glass windows and read my message.

    But of course … being the negative person you are, I would venture to say the first (and probably only) comment you read was the one who gave the book one star. And from his comments, I doubt this person even read the book. In fact, now that I think about it, he reminds me a lot of you. Bluster without any substance.

    Like

  8. @ Kathy,

    I’d like to rephrase this:

    Exactly. The fact that you believe as ardently as you do means that no matter how much evidence anyone might have wouldn’t convince you that you’re wrong.

    We are all evaluating evidence here. Most of us are looking at the same evidence and coming to different conclusions. Because you believe you’ve come to the correct conclusions there isn’t much that could be presented that would change your mind about that. Unless you have some question in your mind anything given to the contrary of your held position is likely to either be dismissed or reinterpreted by you to uphold your belief.

    Like

  9. “Mike and Portal — your discussion about Hell being emptied and destroyed referenced passages that talk about Hades, not Hell.”

    Nate in the NT teaching no stern distinction can be made between Hades and gehenna for the unsaved. Greek mythology matters not a thing to me or the Bible. Its the biblical connotations of the word that means something and hades is in fact a place of torment for the unsaved.

    Luke 16:23 (KJV)
    23 And in hell [hades] he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

    Now are those that think that the lake of fire is synonymous with Gehenna? Yes but they do so based on reference to fire and torment and yet Luke 16 has the same in reference to Hades. So the distinction is weak at best. Are they different ? yes because hades has a closer association to the grave and gehenna to the soul state but since unsaved people who die end up in a place that is described in t he same terms the great distinction isn’t anywhere definitive as you claim.

    “But in the NT, the place that Jesus talked about that most closely matches our understanding of Hell is Gehenna”

    If you are referring to Mark 9 it doesn’t help the case of people living forever in hell because mark says only the flames are eternal. If gehenna is the lake of fire then revelations explains why it would be eternal because of the three entities that would be tormented their forever and not every unsaved human being. Theres nothing in Mark 9 that claims because the flames go on everyone survives them

    “When I was a Christian, I viewed Hades as a holding tank — a place where everyone went until the day of judgment.”

    Thats interesting you were taught that but thats not in the text and ENTIRELY unbiblical since Paul clearly teaches every believer that dies goes to be present with the lord who is in heaven not in some holding state

    2 Corinthians 5:6-8 (KJV)
    6 Therefore we are always confident, knowing that, whilst we are at home in the body, we are absent from the Lord:
    7 (For we walk by faith, not by sight:)
    8 We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.

    revelations has believer in heaven before even the return of christ. So that doesn’t really fly as a christian teaching.

    Like

  10. I judged atheists in the same exact way. All I can do now is tell them I’m sorry.” – and I forgive you. Except possibly for the “Dirty Bird” thing, I’m still working on that —

    (Kidding!)

    Like

  11. ” And from his comments, I doubt this person even read the book. In fact, now that I think about it, he reminds me a lot of you. Bluster without any substance.”

    Nan I’ve read more than enough of what you write and bluster without substance about sums EVERYTHING you write. the one star reviewer was on the money and we both know almost all of the positive reviewers were your cronies at these atheist sites.

    Like

  12. Well Mike, it does count as Christian teaching, because at least some Christians teach it. As to whether or not it’s the “correct” teaching I have no idea. But then again, I don’t expect the Bible’s teachings on it to be consistent anyway. Just too many different authors with too many different theologies.

    As to the Greek thing, I do think it’s important to consider, since the NT uses the Greek terms “Hades” and “Tartarus.” If the NT writers had meant something else, then they would have used different terms. I just think it’s hard to argue that they didn’t borrow from the Greek culture when they use Greek names for these places.

    But there are countless views on Heaven and Hell (as well as everything in between). I’m not saying one is right or another is wrong, because I don’t believe in either place anyway. I was only trying to add to the conversation by pointing out the word usage.

    Like

  13. “These verses are in there, perhaps I’m misunderstanding them… but if I’m going to read it, I shouldn’t ignore passages. And like I said, these passages don’t sit well with me to be honest. ”

    Port my point was to the eternal nature of punishment not to your idea that people should never suffer for their choices against God. the standard is not what “sits well” with you. God does not care about your ideologies that everyone that does anything wrong should be handed a lollipop with sweet flavors to enjoy.

    Let me guess. you probably think prison should be great place to be and capital punishment even for the most heinous murders is wrong right?

    Like

  14. instead most here were asking for the ‘plug’ to be pulled for this thread.” Two suggested the ‘plug’ be pulled, which would imply there are only three of us on the board – do you SEE what you do with the truth?

    RE: “We have NO PROOF that God doesn’t exist.” – which god would that be (there have been over 2000!)? Please show me your evidence that Zeus does not exist.

    Like

  15. “Paul clearly teaches every believer that dies goes to be present with the lord who is in heaven not in some holding state”

    “8 We are confident, I say, and willing rather to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord.”

    That’s not what it says. It says they are WILLING to be absent from the body and to be present with the Lord.

    Like

  16. For many people what the phrase “to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord”, means is that when one dies is immediately with the Lord. However, a careful reading shows that this is not what the passage says. Really, what it says is that “WE ARE WILLING to be absent from the body, AND PRESENT WITH THE LORD”. The phrase “we are willing” shows that the passage states a will, a wish, which is not a wish to die but a wish “to be absent from the body and present with Lord”. Though a full and clear picture of what this phrase means will be possible only after the examination of its context, we can from the outset preclude that it could ever mean that when one dies he is immediately with the Lord for in a case like this, there would be a stark contradiction with I Thessalonians 4:15-17 that says:I Thessalonians 4:15-17
    “For this we say to you by the word of the Lord, that we who are alive and remain until the coming of the Lord will by no means precede those which are asleep. For the Lord himself will descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trumpet of God: and the dead in Christ will rise first: Then we who are alive and remain shall be caught up together with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: AND THUS [i.e. by this way, the resurrection of the dead Christians and the changing of the body of the alive ones] we SHALL always be with the Lord.” (The Journal of Biblical Accuracy)

    Like

  17. Mike, you do know the definition of “assume” don’t you? You might be better served not to make so many assumptions in your comments.

    Like

  18. tell me you know what God didn’t know.” – since your god doesn’t exist, then everything I know, and that is a COPIOUS quantity of information, is something your imaginary god doesn’t know.

    Like

  19. “Well Mike, it does count as Christian teaching, because at least some Christians teach it”

    Nope. thats a ludicrous criteria. If some atheist says all christians should be killed will that cut it if I tell you its an atheist teaching? Do tell.Besides Christianity is an adherence to the NT. its not whatever you want it to be.

    ” I just think it’s hard to argue that they didn’t borrow from the Greek culture when they use Greek names for these places.”

    Sheesh what a poor point. THINK Nate. They spoke Greek. What terms were they supposed to use -ones no one knew? Even when they were relating jewish concepts they used greek words. did they borrow the jewish concepts from Greeks because they spake it?

    “. I was only trying to add to the conversation by pointing out the word usage.”

    Well lets be honest here. Its not just an academic point to an atheist. after all the whole torment forever is a major selling point to try and convince people to flake out on their faith.

    Like

  20. “Mike, you do know the definition of “assume” don’t you? You might be better served not to make so many assumptions in your comments.”

    nan I’ve read your stuff. its not an assumption. An assumption would be that you magically improved when writing a kindle book.

    Like

  21. “For many people what the phrase “to be absent from the body, and to be present with the Lord”, means is that when one dies is immediately with the Lord. However, a careful reading shows that this is not what the passage says”

    KK you teaching what the bible says is like a Holocaust denier telling me what Ann Frank meant. laughable and of no substance

    Like

  22. Here you go, Mike, since you’ve been angling for it so hard. Your latest comments to kc and nan put you over the top. Congratulations.

    Like

  23. Here KK go find a copy and paste commentary for this

    “Revelation 7:14-15 (ASV)
    14 And I say unto him, My lord, thou knowest. And he said to me, These are they that come of the great tribulation, and they washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.
    15 Therefore are they before the throne of God; and they serve him day and night in his temple: and he that sitteth on the throne shall spread his tabernacle over them. ”

    Oops Christians in heaven before the events of Revelation 20 not in a holding area hades.

    Like

  24. “Sheesh what a poor point. THINK Nate. They spoke Greek. What terms were they supposed to use -ones no one knew? Even when they were relating jewish concepts they used greek words. did they borrow the jewish concepts from Greeks because they spake it?”

    The spoken languages among the Jews of that period [at the time of Jesus] were Hebrew, Aramaic, and to an extent Greek. Until recently, it was believed by numerous scholars that the language spoken by Jesus’ disciples was Aramaic. It is possible that Jesus did, from time to time, make use of the Aramaic language. (hebrews4christians.com)

    Aramaic was the common language of the Eastern Mediterranean during and after the Neo-Assyrian, Neo-Babylonian, and Achaemenid Empires (722–330 BC) and remained a common language of the region in the first century AD. In spite of the increasing importance of Greek, the use of Aramaic was also expanding, and it would eventually be dominant among Jews both in the Holy Land and elsewhere in the Middle East around 200 AD[3] and would remain so until the Arab conquest in the seventh century.[4][5] (wiki)

    Unquestionably the Apostle Paul was fluent in Hebrew since he was educated as a Pharisee in Jerusalem. (hebrew4christians.com)

    Like

Comments are closed.