![\"Marko](\"https:\/\/www.bartehrman.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/Marko-Marina-Author-Bart-Ehrman.png\" "\\"Marko")
<\/span><\/p>\nWritten by Marko Marina, Ph.D.<\/a><\/p>\n Author | Historian<\/p>\n Author | Historian | BE Contributor<\/p>\n Verified! See our guidelines<\/a><\/p>\n Verified! See our editorial guidelines<\/a><\/p>\n \nDate written: November 10th, 2023<\/p>\n Edited by Laura Robinson, Ph.D.<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n\nDate written: November 10th, 2023\n Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily match my own. – Dr. Bart D. Ehrman<\/p>\n In a world where the Bible has been published in over 1200 languages, it’s astounding to reflect on its ancient origins and development. In this article, we’ll unveil the linguistic origins of both the Hebrew and the Christian Bible, exploring their unique features and significance.<\/p>\n Join us on a captivating voyage that traverses ancient languages, parchment scrolls, scribal intentional and unintentional mistakes, theological polemics, ancient translations, and amazing archeological discoveries.<\/p>\n Our journey begins with the fascinating question: What language the Bible was first written in? Let’s embark on this historical expedition to uncover the foundations of a timeless and universally cherished text, from the original language of the Bible to the pivotal translation work of figures like Jerome and the emergence of the Latin Vulgate. <\/p>\n Before we begin, it\u2019s important to explain what the \u201cBible\u201d is. The Christian Bible consists of the Old Testament (Hebrew Bible) and the New Testament. Together, the canon of the Christian Bible includes 66 (Protestant) or 73 (Catholic) books. The Hebrew Bible (with three sections known as Torah<\/a>, Nevi\u2019im, and Ketuvim), is the religious cornerstone of the Jewish people.<\/p>\n So, our exploration of the original language of the Bible will include both the Hebrew and the Christian Bible. We\u2019ll uncover different developmental paths and historical circumstances that shaped both of these traditions in a particular way! <\/p>\n The Hebrew Bible, as shown in our earlier article<\/a>, was composed over several centuries. It took even more time for the canonization of the Hebrew Bible<\/a> – a process that probably began before Christianity even appeared. <\/p>\n Hebrew is the original language in which the majority of the Old Testament’s books, including the Torah (the first five books), historical writings, prophetic texts, and poetic literature.<\/p>\n Hebrew is one of the oldest known languages, and its origins can be traced back to the second millennium BCE. It belongs to the Semitic language family, which includes other languages like Aramaic, Akkadian, and Arabic. Furthermore, Hebrew is written from right to left and uses a unique script known as the Hebrew alphabet, which consists of 22 letters.<\/p>\n However, it\u2019s important to note that some parts of the Hebrew Bible (e.g. the Book of Daniel) were partially written in Aramaic<\/strong> – another Semitic language that later became the spoken language of the Palestinian Jews. Jesus of Nazareth, of course, preached in Aramaic. <\/p>\n In his Commentary on the Book of Daniel<\/a>, John J. Collins observes that Daniel is bilingual, being partly in Hebrew and partly in Aramaic. This phenomenon, Collins notes, has given rise to numerous theories, which inevitably involve broader questions of the composition history of the book.<\/p>\n Consequently, one could argue that the language the Bible was first written in was Hebrew and then Aramaic. But Jews also recognized the practical advantages of subsequent translations of the Scripture.<\/p>\n In contrast to the Islamic position which demands that the only authentic version is the Arabic Quran, Jews and Christians accepted translations as the authentic words of God. In other words, both of these traditions canonized compositions and not the languages<\/strong>. They understood that moving from the original language of the Bible doesn\u2019t necessarily contaminate God\u2019s word.<\/p>\n In addition to Hebrew, the Bible language, Jews developed three ancient versions or translations.<\/p>\n These translations and revisions reveal a fascinating historical sequence. Notice that the Greek translation from the original Hebrew which began in the 3rd century B.C.E. reflects a period when Judaism was still an \u201cequal player\u201d among religious sects of the Roman Empire. It\u2019s the same with the Aramaic translation completed in the 1st century C.E.<\/p>\n The second time translations happened was with Arabic and the arrival of a new religious movement or Islam which was based on the Arabic language. For the Jews living in the Near East area under the authority of Islamic invaders, the Arabic translation of the Bible was much needed.<\/p>\n So, these Jewish translations from the original language of the Bible can be seen as rhetorical strategies to preserve the stability and prosperity of their religious communities.<\/p>\n NOW AVAILABLE FREE!<\/p>\n Did Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John Actually Write Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John?<\/strong><\/p>\n The New Testament Gospels are anonymous. So why did early Christians say they were written by Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John? And what’s the evidence that they actually did?<\/p>\n __CONFIG_colors_palette__{“active_palette”:0,”config”:{“colors”:{“62516”:{“name”:”Main Accent”,”parent”:-1}},”gradients”:[]},”palettes”:[{“name”:”Default Palette”,”value”:{“colors”:{“62516”:{“val”:”rgb(255, 133, 34)”,”hsl”:{“h”:26,”s”:0.99,”l”:0.5667}}},”gradients”:[]}}]}__CONFIG_colors_palette__ <\/span> GET THE FREE WEBINAR<\/strong><\/span><\/span> <\/a> The original language of the New Testament was Koine Greek<\/em><\/strong>. Koine Greek is a variant of the Greek language that emerged in the Hellenistic period, roughly from the 4th century BCE to the 4th century CE. It was a simplified and widely spoken form of Greek that developed as a lingua franca in the eastern Mediterranean and the Near East following the conquests of Alexander the Great (356.-323. B.C.E.).<\/p>\n The choice to use Koine Greek for the New Testament made the message of Christianity more accessible to a broader audience. In other words, it was a rhetorical strategy to reach a wider audience. <\/p>\n However, despite being written in Koine Greek, the New Testament documents contain elements of Semitism or the Aramaic language. This is especially vivid within the Synoptic Gospels<\/a>.<\/p>\n For example, in Mark 5:41, when Jesus raises a young girl from the dead, he says, “Talitha koum,” which is an Aramaic phrase that Mark transliterates into Greek. In other words, the author of the Gospel of Mark<\/a> sometimes retains Aramaic phrases that were significant in the context of the narrative.<\/p>\n Furthermore, these Semitic traces, as Dr. Ehrman notes in his bestseller Jesus: Apocalyptic Prophet of the New Millennium<\/a> provide another criterion for establishing the authentic parts that could be traced to the historical Jesus.<\/p>\n The Latin version of the Christian Bible<\/strong> arose in the heart of the Roman Empire and eventually became the most important translation. It also reflects early Christian steps from the original language of the Bible. <\/p>\n To understand the development of this process we need to comprehend basic historical circumstances. <\/em><\/p>\n When Emperor Constantine (c. 280.-337. C.E.) shifted his capital to Constantinople, the Church in the east remained Greek-speaking. In other words, Christians there continued to read Septuagint and the New Testament in Greek – the original language of the (Christian) Bible. <\/p>\n Furthermore, eastern Christianity had a tremendous continuity of language and literature<\/strong>. Consequently, the Greek written and spoken in the 6th century, for instance, was the same Koine Greek in which the New Testament had been originally written. <\/p>\n The situation in the Western part of the Roman Empire, however, was different. In the absence of the emperor (since the middle of the 4th century), the bishop of Rome exercised supreme ecclesiastical and increasingly strong political authority.<\/p>\n Moreover, as the East remained exclusively Greek, the West became increasingly Latin<\/strong>. The adoption of Latin as the official language of the Bible represented an important aspect of the growing cultural distance between Eastern and Western Christianity. This distance eventually led to a schism in the middle of the 11th century.<\/p>\n The beginning stages of the Latin Bible in the West are obscure. Latin is the ancestral (Indo-European type) language of Rome. Already during the Republic and before Christianity ever emerged, Romans had developed a great literature in Latin (e.g. Cicero\u2019s Orations).<\/p>\n We can speculate that the earliest Latin translations of the Bible appeared in the 2nd century C.E. However, it\u2019s not that clear where it happened. Most scholars believe that North Africa is the best hypothesis<\/strong>. It\u2019s an educational guess based on several key observations:<\/p>\n The proliferation of many early Latin translations that scholars call \u201cOld Latin\u201d versions is remarkable. They show that the early Christians weren\u2019t at all bound by the original language of the Bible.<\/p>\n As it turns out, such a proliferation caused the need for a standard Latin translation (Vulgate) done by Jerome. We\u2019ll get back to him soon! <\/p>\n Did You Know?<\/strong><\/p>\n Although he translated from the Hebrew original, Jerome was subtle in the manner in which he rendered key prophetic texts at certain points. For him, it was crucial to retain the validity of Jesus\u2019 prophecy fulfillment. In Isaiah 7:14, for instance, Jerome\u2019s Vulgate translates the Hebrew \u201calmah\u201d (young girl) as \u201cvirgo\u201d (virgin). Thus, he pushed the Hebrew in the direction of Septuagint to preserve the Christian meaning of the text! <\/em><\/p>\n Additionally, many Christian authors of Late Antiquity recognized that these \u201cOld Latin\u201d versions suffer from poor quality. They were far from the language the Bible was first written in. An excellent example of this comes from the Old Latin manuscript known as Codex Veronensis.<\/p>\n Check out noticeable and important differences in the prologue of John (1:12-13) between the original Greek text and the Codex Veronensis.<\/p>\n![\"What](\"https:\/\/www.bartehrman.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/What-Was-the-Original-Language-of-the-Bible.png\" "\\"What")
<\/span><\/p>\nDefining Terms: What is the Bible?<\/h2>\n
The Original Language of the Hebrew Bible<\/h2>\n
Early Translations of the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament)<\/h2>\n
\n
![\"Did](\"https:\/\/www.bartehrman.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/Did-Matthew-Mark-Luke-and-John-Write-the-Gospels.png\" "\\"Did")
<\/a><\/span> <\/p>\nThe Original Language of the New Testament<\/h2>\n
Early Translations of the Christian Bible: from Old Latin to Vulgate<\/h2>\n
The Earliest Latin Translations of the Bible<\/h2>\n
\n
![\"What](\"https:\/\/www.bartehrman.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/What-Was-the-Original-Language-of-the-Old-Testament-and-New-Testament.png\" "\\"What")
<\/span><\/p>\n