"I will bless those who bless you, And I will curse him who curses you"

reply to post by sk0rpi0n

The actual thing was written in Hebrew, Greek and Latin.

That is in Luke 23:38, in brackets, meaning it was a scribal note put in afterwards, and is left out in most English translations.
The word translated as Hebrew occurs only once in the New Testament, and means 'the language of the Jews', often translated as Aramaic, since technically that was the language of the Jews then, and not actual Hebrew like the Old Testament was written in and which was only read when the scrolls were brought out in the synagogues, with a translator standing by to give the version the people could understand.
John 19:20 gives a parallel account using a different Greek word for Hebrew, or rather Aramaic, but means basically the same thing.
The Medieval Bible in Latin would of course give a Latin reading but it would only be a translation of the Greek, since that was what the NT was written in.

reply to post by sk0rpi0n

I'm guessing "I AM" means the word of God, which is what Jesus was.

That's a slogan recited by the enemies of Christianity.
According to the Gospel of John, Jesus is the NAME of God, not the 'word' as those would like for people to believe.
The Name embodied the essence of God, and was personified as a physical entity, formerly by things like fires and smoke and thunderous noises like a voice from Heaven.
Now in the form of the man Jesus, preaching and healing and giving his life so others can live.
Jesus is now, The Name of God, spelled out repeatedly by Jesus, as recorded by the writer of John.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by sk0rpi0n

 

I'm guessing "I AM" means the word of God, which is what Jesus was.

That's a slogan recited by the enemies of Christianity.
According to the Gospel of John, Jesus is the NAME of God, not the 'word' as those would like for people to believe.
The Name embodied the essence of God, and was personified as a physical entity, formerly by things like fires and smoke and thunderous noises like a voice from Heaven.
Now in the form of the man Jesus, preaching and healing and giving his life so others can live.
Jesus is now, The Name of God, spelled out repeatedly by Jesus, as recorded by the writer of John.

edit on 14-3-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)

Logos is one of the three Greek terms for "word", by implication a written word.

reply to post by NOTurTypical

Logos is one of the three Greek terms for "word", by implication a written word.

Logos was also used as a philosophical term, and not just by the Greeks, but the Jews, Like Philo of Alexandria, who used it not unlike the gnostics of his day.
If you are thinking that John 1 says that the Logos was Jesus, it doesn't. It says it was "in" us, meaning the Logos was experienced internally by the disciples. It very well could have meant something very different than what it is normally accepted as meaning.
The important thing described in John is the establishment of the church, and the special power given directly to the disciples, for that purpose, by Jesus after his return from Heaven and having been given that power himself by God.
The introduction to the Gospel is a spelling out of the bona fide's of John to write a Gospel, or rather a book, that is worthy of inclusion into the canon as scripture.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by sk0rpi0n

 

The actual thing was written in Hebrew, Greek and Latin.

That is in Luke 23:38, in brackets, meaning it was a scribal note put in afterwards, and is left out in most English translations.
The word translated as Hebrew occurs only once in the New Testament, and means 'the language of the Jews', often translated as Aramaic, since technically that was the language of the Jews then, and not actual Hebrew like the Old Testament was written in and which was only read when the scrolls were brought out in the synagogues, with a translator standing by to give the version the people could understand.
John 19:20 gives a parallel account using a different Greek word for Hebrew, or rather Aramaic, but means basically the same thing.
The Medieval Bible in Latin would of course give a Latin reading but it would only be a translation of the Greek, since that was what the NT was written in.

edit on 14-3-2013 by jmdewey60 because: (no reason given)

Wanna see the difference between aramaic and hebrew spoken 2000 years ago?

Here it is:



The only difference between ancient aramaic and ancient hebrew, is like the difference between british spoken english and american spoken english. Same language with different slang.

reply to post by lonewolf19792000

The only difference between ancient aramaic and ancient hebrew, is like the difference between british spoken english and american spoken english. Same language with different slang.

You are looking at a table of alphabets and according to that, modern English is the same too.
Those were two completely different languages (Hebrew and Aramaic) that both ended up adopting the Babylonian characters.