0

I want to know the probable original Hebrew statement spoken by Jesus in Jn 10:30:

"I and the Father are one."

"Egō kai ho Patēr hen esmen."

Specifically, I want to know whether the probable original Hebrew statement included the word ’eḥāḏ or echad in the Shema (Deut 6:4):

"Hear, O Israel: YHWH is our God, YHWH is one."

"Sh'ma Yisra'el, YHWH 'eloheinu, YHWH ’eḥāḏ."

The reason of my question is clear: if ’eḥāḏ was in the original Hebrew version of Jn 10:30, Jesus was stating directly the compatibility of the binitarism [1] He was revealing at that time with Hebrew monotheism.

I am clearly taking the short route for the question, assuming either that there is trivial homology between Aramaic and Hebrew, as e.g. between Spanish and Portuguese, or that Jesus actually spoke the Jn 10:30 statement in Hebrew, which is plausible since his audience at that time in Jerusalem was not a crowd of simple Galileans but rather comprised of many Pharisees and scribes, much like the audience in Jerusalem to which Paul spoke in Hebrew in Acts 22:1-21.

But if an Aramaic-mastering user wants to go the long route for the answer, i.e. to give the Aramaic version of the Shema and the probable original Aramaic statement spoken by Jesus in Jn 10:30, so as to see whether the Aramaic equivalent of ’eḥāḏ is in the latter, feel free to go ahead.

[1] Jesus did not reveal that the Holy Spirit was a distinct divine Person until the Farewell Discourse, John chapters 14-17. If someone disagrees with this point, please do not touch it in your answer but open your own question about it.

Note: asking for "the probable original Hebrew statement spoken by Jesus in Jn 10:30" amounts, in practice, to asking for "a reliable Hebrew translation of the koine Greek text of Jn 10:30". Whether a translation to language Y of a text in language X is reliable is mostly an objective matter. Therefore, the question is not opinion-based. But since I am already satisfied with Perry Webb's response, you can leave it on hold if you like.

Johannes
  • 1,025
  • 6
  • 15
  • Your question indicates that this is a matter of opinion in that you state the 'probable original'. – Nigel J Feb 27 '18 at 15:17
  • 1
    I said "probable original" not to mean that the issue is a matter of opinion, but as an expression of epistemic humbleness. If the answering user is absolutely sure that the Hebrew version he is providing was the spoken by our Lord Jesus Christ, he can just say that it has 100% probability. – Johannes Feb 27 '18 at 15:23
  • 3
    This question doesn't have the same controls (or interest) as a somewhat analogous question: "What did Jesus likely say in John 8:58?". Whether the word "one" is in Hebrew, Greek, Aramaic, English, or Runyoro makes no odds. The meaning is the same, and Jesus' claim is the same -- I fail to see what difference the language used makes. – Dɑvïd Feb 27 '18 at 15:30
  • @Johannes I don't see how any 'answering user' could possibly be 'absolutely sure' or even remotely sure of what was said at the time. All we have is the apostolic documentation - which is in Greek. – Nigel J Feb 27 '18 at 15:37
  • 1
    Jesus states (John 14:26) the Holy Spirit will remind the disciples everything Jesus said. The consequence of this is the Greek reflects the exact words; if there is an "translation" issue it is how the Greek would be conveyed in Aramaic, not the Aramaic into Greek. Your question assumes the original speech was in Aramaic despite the Gospel which states otherwise. You assume since Jesus (likely) spoke Aramaic He delivered His discourses in Aramaic which His disciples (later) translated into Greek. However, John says whatever language may have been common, His teaching was spoken in Greek. – Revelation Lad Feb 27 '18 at 17:16
  • @Nigel, that's exactly why I said "probable original". I mentioned the hypothesis of an answering user being "absolutely sure" in my previous comment just to show that, IF you insisted in your objection to my use of "probable original", THEN there was a way to circumvent it. – Johannes Feb 27 '18 at 19:10
  • @Revelation Lad, until you show proof on the contrary, I think that you are the only person in the world who holds that the sayings of Jesus recorded in the canonical Gospels were originally spoken by Jesus in Greek. – Johannes Feb 27 '18 at 19:16
  • @David, the difference that the presence or absence of ’eḥāḏ would make in that statement is a stronger resonance of its meaning (which I agree is the same in all languages) in the minds of the Jewish audience listening to the statement, since they would have immediately related it to the Shema. – Johannes Feb 27 '18 at 19:21
  • 1
    I am just stating what the canonical text states. The absence of a Hebrew or Aramaic canon is evidence no such document existed, unless one is to believe the original believers who (presumably) all spoke Aramaic had greater interest in preserving a second-hand record than the original. Do you believe your question on the difficulty of conveying one to the other was unknown to the original writers? And if such difficulties exist, why create a second-hand account to create the difficulties and fail to preserve the clarity of the original? – Revelation Lad Feb 27 '18 at 19:29
  • @Revelation lad, on the contrary, the canonical Gospels state explicitely that Jesus spoke Aramaic, by quoting his original words several times. I will not pursue this discussion. – Johannes Feb 27 '18 at 19:33
  • 1
    Perhaps the correct understanding of that text is exactly what it says: those words were spoken and preserved in Aramaic. – Revelation Lad Feb 27 '18 at 20:02
  • This Gospel was written at least fifty years after Jesus' death. Any eyewitness accounts are already not trustworthy any more. So it is already a leap to claim that Jesus indeed said something like this, leave alone reconstructing the words in another language. –  Feb 28 '18 at 03:40
  • 1
    @Keelan, so, you are either denying that the author of John's Gospel was an eyewitness of Jesus' public ministry, or that if he was, he no longer had a clear recollection of Jesus' words by the time when he wrote the Gospel, or that even if he had, he just made up Jesus' words. In any of these cases, you are just making an assumption, so quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur. – Johannes Feb 28 '18 at 16:30
  • Neither of those are big leaps or anything. The text was probably not written by an eyewitness. It was written around 90-110CE, i.e. at least 55 years after the end of Jesus' ministry. It would be a leap to say someone can wordly recollect something said by someone that long ago (if the author even had access to first-hand accounts). See the Wikipedia article for details. –  Feb 28 '18 at 20:30
  • John 10:30 echoes Genesis 2:24. – Lucian Mar 04 '18 at 15:31

1 Answers1

1

Note: we can only guess. The following translations are probably better than we can guess. Some people even argue that Jesus taught in Greek.

This translation is identical to Delitszch's translation:

אֲנִי וְהָאָב אֶחָד אֲנַחְנוּ

enter image description here

ha-Berit ha-ḥadashah. (2000). (Jn 10:30). Israel: The Bible Society in Israel.

The Peshitta is pretty much the same, except for "my Father" instead of "the Father":

ܐܷܢܳܐ ܘܳܐܒ݂ܝ ܂ ܚܰܕ݂ ܚܢܰܢ ܂

enter image description here

Kiraz, G. A. (2002). The Peshitta (Jn 10:30). Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.

This is virtually word for word with the Greek except for "my" in the Peshitta:

ἐγὼ καὶ ὁ πατὴρ ἕν ἐσμεν.

Nestle, E., Nestle, E., Aland, B., Aland, K., Karavidopoulos, J., Martini, C. M., & Metzger, B. M. (1993). The Greek New Testament (27th ed., Jn 10:30). Stuttgart: Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft.

Perry Webb
  • 20,235
  • 3
  • 29
  • 75
  • 1
    The Syriac differs from both Greek and Modern Hebrew in the pronominal suffix to 'ab: "my father". The addition of 'anaHnû / Hnan is a translation issue to indicate the plurality of the verb, it sounds artificial in the ancient languages. The original would have more likely lacked that last word, and the plural form in Greek can easily be explained by semantic agreement. But like I said on the question, all of this is guesswork. –  Feb 28 '18 at 03:54
  • I think we have exhausted all we can reasonably say other than the response of Jesus' listeners: " The Jews answered him, “It is not for a good work that we are going to stone you but for blasphemy, because you, being a man, make yourself God.”

    The Holy Bible: English Standard Version. (2016). (Jn 10:33). Wheaton: Standard Bible Society.

     – Perry Webb Feb 28 '18 at 09:49
  • @Perry, I accepted your answer. Notably, GT translates it as "I and my father are all alone", while if you take out the last word and leave "אֲנִי וְהָאָב אֶחָד", GT translates it as "I and my father are one". Since both possibililites have "אֶחָד" (’eḥāḏ), my question is answered affirmatively in any case. Thanks. – Johannes Feb 28 '18 at 16:43
  • Google Translate has no support for the language spoken by Jesus. –  Feb 28 '18 at 20:33