What is your opinion on Aramaic Primacy?

Aramaic Primacy is a theory that suggests that the original language of the New Testament was Aramaic, rather than Greek. This theory is based on a number of factors, including the fact that Jesus and his followers spoke Aramaic, the similarities between certain Aramaic and Greek words in the New Testament, and the presence of Aramaic words and phrases in the Greek text.

There are certainly scholars who believe that Aramaic Primacy is a valid theory. They argue that the text of the New Testament contains many Aramaic idioms and expressions that would be difficult to explain if the original language was Greek. They also point to the fact that the earliest Christian communities were primarily Aramaic-speaking, and that it would make sense for the New Testament to be written in their native language.

On the other hand, there are many scholars who reject the theory of Aramaic Primacy. They argue that the evidence for Aramaic as the original language of the New Testament is not strong enough to support such a claim. They also point out that the Greek language was widely spoken and understood in the ancient world, and that it would have been a natural choice for the authors of the New Testament to use.

One of the key challenges in assessing the theory of Aramaic Primacy is the fact that we do not have any surviving Aramaic manuscripts of the New Testament. The earliest surviving manuscripts are in Greek, which has led some scholars to argue that Greek was the original language of the New Testament. However, others point out that the absence of Aramaic manuscripts does not necessarily mean that Aramaic was not the original language, as manuscripts in any language can be lost or destroyed over time.

Subscribe to Bible Analysis

Sign up now to get access to the library of members-only issues.
Jamie Larson