Mark and Matthew record Jesus speaking Aramiac from the cross:
And at the ninth hour Jesus cried with a loud voice, “Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?” which means, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Mark 15:34 ESV)
And about the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, “Eli, Eli, lema sabachthani?” that is, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46 ESV)
All other times they record Jesus words using the Greek language. It is accepted that Aramaic was the language Jesus spoke. However, it is obvious that many, if not all of the Apostles were able to communicate in both Aramaic and Greek (and probably knew Latin). So it seems likely that Jesus also was able to speak in both Aramaic and Greek.
Mark and Matthew are purposeful to make the point that when Jesus quoted Psalm 22 He used Aramaic. Consequently they are purposeful to exclude any possible confusion or claim that Jesus quoted the Greek translation of the Psalm, which in the Septuagint is significantly different at that point: ὁ θεὸς ὁ θεός μου πρόσχες μοι (O God, my God, take heed to me). Quoting the Greek lacks the personal pronoun at the beginning and would also have Jesus asking God to take heed of Him, something the Aramaic precludes.
While the use of the Aramaic quotation can be seen as purposeful to ensure Jesus correctly quotes the Psalm, it also gives reason to question the assertion that all of the other sayings of Jesus were exclusively spoken in Aramaic and translated into Greek.
What is the evidence Jesus spoke exclusively in Aramaic and never used the Greek language?
RichardAnna Boyce
Entire sanctification is an important doctrine in Wesleyan theology. It offers the hope that Christians are able to live without sin during their lives on Earth. But this claim doesn’t account for numerous New Testament texts which describe a struggle between the flesh and the spirit. In Galatians 5:17, Paul describes struggling against the sinful tendencies of our flesh as if it were a normative part of the Christian experience. In Romans 7:18 Paul says, “the wishing (of doing good) is present in me, but the doing of the good is not.” How does the doctrine of entire sanctification explain how statements like these can come from a mature Christian?………. Wesley’s doctrine of entire sanctification leans heavily on his vague definition of sin. He believed that a Christian who has experienced entire sanctification enjoys freedom from deliberate sins. Slip-ups in behavior can still occur, but these result from living in a fallen world. Wesley called these lapses “mistakes.” He said, “because we are imperfect persons in an imperfect world, perfection ‘in love’ is consistent with a ‘thousand mistakes.’ But limited as we are by our own and the world’s imperfections, we may still enjoy a relationship in which, through the power of the Holy Spirit, we can fulfill the great and final commandment of loving God with our whole heart…”
By creating the categories of willful sin and “mistakes,” Wesley erodes a broader definition of sin found in Romans 14:23: “whatever is not from faith is sin.” The Bible portrays sin as any action, deed, or thought that falls short of God’s perfect character (Rom. 3:23). This is clear from Jesus’ repeated contrasts, “you have heard… but I say to you,” in the Sermon on the Mount. By equating murder with anger and lust with adultery, Jesus is trying to expose the superficial, shallow view of sin held by his audience. Wesley’s attempt to separate “sins” from “mistakes” misses the all-inclusive spirit of these and other New Testament passages.