Robert Reymond in "Paul: Missionary Theologian", page 47 seems to suggest that perhaps he did.

__________________
Pergamum


"If a commission by an earthly king is considered a honor, how can a commission by a Heavenly King be considered a sacrifice?"
-- David Livingstone

I've been to a bible study where I was told I was wrong for saying Romans was written in greek and not Latin.

__________________
J. P. Grigoletti II * Lay-man * Église Réformée du Québec
Québec, Québec Canada * Member: Église Reformée St. Marc
http://Grigoletti.blogspot.com - blog
<<There are three things necessary for thee to know, that thou, enjoying this comfort, mayest live and die happily: the first, how great your sins and miseries are; the second, how thou may be delivered from all thy sins and miseries; the third, how thou shall express thy gratitude to God for such deliverance.>>

I think it very likely that Paul spoke Latin. Most highly educated Roman citizens would speak Latin, Greek, and the language of their own "tribe." (in this case Hebrew)

__________________
Fred Greco
Senior Pastor, Christ Church PCA (Katy, TX)
Christ Church Blog

"The heart is the main thing in true religion...It is the hinge and turning-point in the condition of man's soul. If the heart is alive to God and quickened by the Spirit, the man is a living Christian. If the heart is dead and has not the Spirit, the man is dead before God." (J.C. Ryle)

If they don't change their minds, sounds like a good Bible study to get out of...

__________________
Richard T. Zuelch, M.Div
Ruling Elder, OPC (not currently serving)
Westminster Presbyterian Church, CA (OPC)
www.alexandermaclaren.wordpress.com
www.reiterations.wordpress.com
www.spurgeonswords.wordpress.com

Devout souls do not take offence at the depths and difficulties of God's Word, but are, thereby, drawn to intenser contemplation of them. - Alexander Maclaren (1826-1910)

Can you give any evidences? Does Paul use any Latinisms in his speeches, is there any tradition or other evidence for this possibility? Would this regimen (of learning Latin too) be a part of sitting at the feet of Gamelial?

One evidence is that Paul is a Latin word, if memory serves. Thus, since his name is a Latinism, it is very likely he learned Latin. Since Christ specifically chose that he would preach the gospel to kings, it is without doubt that he would have known or had to learn the magisterial language of the Roman Empire.

Cheers,

__________________
Adam B., Wine Country, California, PCA

"I fear not to hold with Junius, de Politia Mosis cap. 6, that he who was punishable by death under that Judicial law, is punishable by death still; and he who was not punished by death then, is not to be punished by death now."

Though I can't be dogmatic about it, I would assume that Paul would be very familier with Latin (and any other common language within his missionary trips).

If a highly educated American citizen born overseas who was a buisnessman and scholar lived for a minimum of two years in Washington, there'd not be much question as to whether he could speak English.

__________________
Tim Vaughan
Member, Redeemer Presbyterian, OPC,
Santa Maria
California

Not to quibble... but wasn't Aramaic the vernacular of the 1st Century Jews?

__________________
Ben
Chaplain, US Army
Ft. Riley, KS
TE Ohio Valley Presbytery, PCA

Aramaic in the Palestine and surrounding areas, Persian farther east and Greek in Egypt and Anatolia. So Paul's upbringing would have been Hebrew (religious education) and Greek in daily life. I've read the Celtic and other vernaculars were mostly dead in eastern Anatolia at that time, so Paul's letters to, say, the Galatians would have been in Greek rather than Galatian.

Paul could have learned Latin while growing up in Tarsus since his father, if memory serves, was a Roman citizen (implying having relationships and dealings with non-Jews in the Empire) as well as Paul.

William Hendriksen discusses Paul's use of Latinisms in First Timothy in his introduction to that book in his New Testament Commentary (p. 10-12). I do not have the electronic version of Hendriksen, but someone who does may be able to post his comments and conclusions regarding Paul and Latin in the context of First Timothy.

Discussing Paul's use of Latinism has led some to conclude a different author of First Timothy than Paul. Hendriksen affirms the traditional authorship, which I submit to, and counters: "Is it not entirely natural that a man who had at last reached the world's metropolis, where very recently he had spent not less than two years, a man, moreover, who was highly susceptible to environmental influences and eagerly desirous of becoming all things to all men, would now begin to make fuller use of "Roman" diction and phraseology than he had done heretofore?" (p.11)

Hendriksen, at least in this section, does not address directly Paul's ability to speak Latin, but focuses instead on the Latinisms in the letter, which lends some credibility to the idea of Paul speaking Latin.

__________________
Chris
Teaching Elder (PCUSA)
West Virginia
"Although the fig tree shall not blossom, neither shall fruit be in the vines; the labour of the olive shall fail, and the fields shall yield no meat; the flock shall be cut off from the fold, and there shall be no herd in the stalls: Yet I will rejoice in the LORD, I will joy in the God of my salvation." (Habakkuk 3:17-18)