Speaking to Natives in Foreign Language
Acts 22:2 (NIV2011)
2 When they heard him speak to them in Aramaic, they became very quiet. Then Paul said:
This NIV2011 seeks to comply with modernistic liberal ideas but in fact it is insane to assume Paul was speaking to Jewish people using Aramaic. Paul was a Hebrew and it is only natural that he would speak to his fellow Jewish people in their native tongue of Hebrew. This is the reason they become quiet because Paul was speaking to them in their native tongue of Hebrew.
Philippians 3:5 (NIV2011)
5 circumcised on the eighth day, of the people of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews; in regard to the law, a Pharisee;
The same NIV2011 does translate that Paul said he was a Hebrew of Hebrews, so why would they have the outlandish idea that Paul would speak to his fellow Hebrew-speaking Jewish people in “Aramaic” instead of in Hebrew? This is again the work of laymen bible translators who are void of common sense.
John 20:16 (NIV2011)
16 Jesus said to her, “Mary.” She turned toward him and cried out in Aramaic, “Rabboni!” (which means “Teacher”).
Again, the NIV2011 inserts their own false assumption that Mary would cry out in “Aramaic” language rather than her native tongue of Hebrew. Mary was a Jew and she was Hebrew and she was speaking to Jesus who was a Jew and also a Hebrew. Why would she use a foreign language of Aramaic to speak to a fellow Hebrew? These laymen theologians translating the NIV2011 appear to be trying to adopt the bible to fit with secular views invented by liberal archaeologists by inserting the word “Aramaic” instead of Hebrew to imply Jews were not speaking their native tongue of Hebrew?
2 Kings 18:26-27 (NLT2)
26 Then Eliakim son of Hilkiah, Shebna, and Joah said to the Assyrian chief of staff, “Please speak to us in Aramaic, for we understand it well. Don’t speak in Hebrew, for the people on the wall will hear.”
27 But Sennacherib’s chief of staff replied, “Do you think my master sent this message only to you and your master? He wants all the people to hear it, for when we put this city under siege, they will suffer along with you. They will be so hungry and thirsty that they will eat their own dung and drink their own urine.”
The invading king of Assyria sent his official to intimidate and cause fear so that the Jewish people would give up and surrender without a fight. Part of this program of intimidation was to speak to the Jews in their native language of Hebrew because that would have greater effect upon the Jews to hear the threats in their native tongue. The Jewish officials asked the Assyrian official to speak in Aramaic (the international language of that day) because they understood it. Aramaic was used as a trade language but they told him not to speak in Hebrew in the hearing of the Jewish men on the wall.
This provides evidence that when Paul spoke to his fellow Jews, he would have used their native language of Hebrew (not the international trade language of Aramaic).
Acts 26:14 (NASB)
14 “And when we had all fallen to the ground, I heard a voice saying to me in the Hebrew dialect, ‘Saul, Saul, why are you persecuting Me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.’
The NASB got it correct saying that the Lord spoke to Paul in his own native tongue f Hebrew.
Acts 26:14 (NIV2011)
14 We all fell to the ground, and I heard a voice saying to me in Aramaic, ‘Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me? It is hard for you to kick against the goads.’
The NIV2011 however thought to insert their own ideas saying the Jesus spoke to Paul in Aramaic language. Why would the Lord speak to Paul in a vision using a foreign language when Jesus was Jewish and he was speaking to Paul who was Jewish and when these Jewish people conversed, they were using their native tongue of Hebrew?
Common sense dictates that if Jesus was speaking to Paul, he would have used Hebrew (not an international trade language) as if he was conversing with a foreigner.