Peshitta Forum

Full Version: And he did not know her
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
At fellowship yesterday myself and a couple of other guys inclduing a Shamasha were discussing how the Aramaic and even modern Assyrian can clear up some contraversies that arise when reading the Bible in english.

Shamasha Ninos stated that in Matthew 1 24 where it talks about Joseph taking Mary as his wife as the Lord commanded and that :"he did not know her" until Jesus was born has been misunderstood. Let me clarify, in Assyrian when we say "La Dewalah" can mean He did not know her, or he did not comprehend or understand it (please correct me if I am wrong).

Therefore the context changes dramatically in this verse, Joseph did not comprehend all these things that were occuring until Jesus was born! It has nothing to do with him actually laying with Mary (Khaslee), he did not comprehend what the Angel was telling him in his dream until the wisemen and the sheep herders all came to worship Jesus. It was only then he comprehended all the things the angel told him in his vision.

What say all of you?
Shlama,

Well ok, what about the virgin birth then?
How should that be understood? Virgin conception, or virgin birth?

How about Luke 1:34
"And Mariam said to the angel, How shall this be, because a man is not known to me?"

OF Course she -knew- some guys! But she simply was a virgin, so, she could not beget a baby. That was her most logical thought.

So, I personally think this is just Semitic idiom, as the dictionary (Payne Smith) says as well for 'sexual intercourse'.
One little twist in the puzzle is that YBig Grin:A is typically translated as the verb "know". The root in Matthew 1:25 is Ch:K:M. For those who think that each root form should be specifically translated, one of the two needs to give way to another word.
Jerry pls elaborate for the uneducated!
matthew often has synonym Aramaic words for which the same composition of rootwords, would follow the same meaning. But it does not.

So, if someone says that the ARamaic for 'to know' should be understood different because of chosen consonants (with symbolic meaning?), the same should apply for Matthew.