Peshitta Forum

Full Version: Acts 18
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Hello everyone.
I was gonna Post something for godparticle but the more I thought about it, the more I realized that there was a problem. As always, the problem may lie with my very limited understanding but walk me through just a little bit.

godparticle Wrote:... lets re-arrange the man-made punctuation (not originally in the Greek) and look at the verse again, using the verse from the KJV...

gp blithely assumes that man-made punctuation may be corrected into a "more correct" punctuation that he can see. If so, then look at this, using Vic Alexander's Translation:

Acts 18: 24 - 28 (Alexander):

24. And a Jewish man whose name was Apollo, who was of Alexandrian origin,* and had accepted the Manifestation and was extremely knowledgeable* in Scriptures, came to Ephesus.
25. He became a disciple of the Lord's Way, and was fervent in Spirit,* and he spoke and taught thoroughly about Jesus, while he knew nothing, except perhaps the baptism of John.
26. And he began indeed to speak openly in the synagogue. And when Acquila and Priscilla heard him, they brought him to their house and showed him the Way of the Lord fully.*
27. And as he wished to go to Achia, the brethren endeavored and wrote* to the disciples to receive him. And as he went, he was of much help in increasing the grace of the faithful.
28. For he argued eruditely against the Jews before the congregation, while he showed from Scriptures regarding Jesus, that he was the Messiah.

*18:24.1 Lit. Ar. idiomatic figure of speech: "From Alexandrian kinship."
*18:24.2 Lit. Ar. id.: "Minutely."
*18:25 Lit. Ar. expression: "Simmered in Spirit."
*18:26 Lit. Ar. expression retained: "Showed him Christian hospitality."
*18:27 Lit. Ar. idiomatic expression retained: "Sent a letter of recommendation."

Now, it's common knowledge that I am ignorant in many matters but I do believe I can help out here a bit. VA has the note for verse 24 as "From Alexandrian kinship" and a further note may be added: "Kinship" is a Technical Term, seen in the Greek Ordering of Herod's Court. The Greek Court was ordered as "Friend", "Honored Friend", "Guard of the Realm" and "Kinsman". There is a Post from a while back positing that the "Wedding Banquet" where Jesus tells everyone to sit at the lower end may be a reflection of this ordering: "Sit with your *Friends* and if you are asked to move to a higher position, you will be *Honored* by your *Friends* ".

The point here is that the person mentioned in the Story is a member of Royalty. He's important. He's Jewish - so it says - by way of Alexandria and is named Apollo. Go figure. Something is hidden here but this Post is written by a person who is intrigued with the Hasmonean "Alexander Jannaeus". Go figure.

Verse 25 is actually a bit dark. I withhold more comment for a while except to say that the "Baptism of John" and the "Baptism of the Holy Spirit" (Supposedly a "Superior" Baptism) should require some deep consideration...
In that vein, the name "Acquila" is a strange one for a lady. "Priscilla" as well. They are Latin words meaning "Eagle" and "Old" (As in, "This-person-may-she-live-to-old-age", evidently.). I've heard of boats named "Eagle" and "Priscilla" but I've never known a female named "Eagle". Priscilla was that nice girl I met in the third grade. Wonder what happened to her?

Let's cut to the chase
: This personage, important as a "Kinsman", says an interesting thing. Following gp's very erudite suggestion, let's drop the COMMA: "... lets re-arrange the man-made punctuation (not originally in the Greek) and look at the verse again, using the verse from the..." Alexander Translation:

"...while he showed from Scriptures regarding Jesus that he was the Messiah".

That WHO was the Messiah?

I went to a Greek Transliteration and found, "...showing by the scriptures to be the Christ Jesus". There are others. Now, I know the straight-forward Translations and what they mean. This one is awkward. Vic Alexander's Translation points to the tension here but even the Greek leaves something that must be explicated.

If the phrase "...while he showed from Scriptures regarding Jesus that he was the Messiah" is acceptable, then this might be another "Herod Story" - Herod Agrippa, that is.

CW
Quote:the name "Acquila" is a strange one for a lady.

Acts 18:2-3: "There he (Paul) met a Jew named Aquila, a native of Pontus, who had recently come from Italy with his wife Priscilla, because Claudius had ordered all the Jews to leave Rome. Paul went to see them, and because he was a tentmaker (actually, a harness maker) as they were, he stayed and worked with them."
Yep! No argument there!
"Harness maker", or "Saddle maker" are possible renderings in English of the Aramaic text, where the Aramaic word "lawlara" carries the general meaning of a "worker of rough cloth", and while the word is more specifically rendered "Harness-maker" or "Saddle-maker", the less specific meaning of a "worker of rough cloth" may be how the Greek scribe mistranslated the Aramaic word, interpreting it to mean "booth-maker" or "tent-maker" which we see now translated into English.

To avoid any possible mistake in an English translation, "workers in rough cloth" would be the best choice.
I've already lost this thread, haven't I?
gp-

Please take your commentary elsewhere, OK? Start your own thread.
I've asked you several times to tell us what you believe about Acts.
No response.

Now I'm trying to get something done with this thread. Poster Aramaic made a point and you immediately attempted to highjack the thread.

Please stop.

CW
shlama gp:
your post has been deleted. I dont redact posts. I just delete offensive name calling as a reminder to you. It's a privilege to post on the forum. You will forfeit that privilege by offensive posts. Cease and desist or I'll move it up a notch. Don't provoke me. Change your tone. I've given you fair warning dear brother.

Shlama,
Stephen Silver
(Forum Moderator)
Shlama Charles,

Could you please break down what it is that you are wanting to say in your OP there? I'm not sure I get the gist of it yet...after reading it a few times now. Thanks.
Aramaic Wrote:Could you please break down what it is that you are wanting to say in your OP there? I'm not sure I get the gist of it yet...after reading it a few times now. Thanks.

Within certain limits, I'll try. I do not wish to offend anyone or their beliefs. The Aramaic Community sits on an astonishing amount of pure gold in regards to understanding what happened 2000 years ago. It has yet to be fully explored although there is progress being made. All you have to do is simply stare at the words: "My God, my God, for this was I spared?" to realize that there is something missing from what we have today. "It's all in Greek and that's the end of it..."

No, that's not the end of it.

Now, sometimes I see things. I read the 2 Stories in Mark, "The Woman with the 12 Year Issue of Blood" and "Jairus' Daughter" and I notice that the common data between them begins with "12 years". "What could that mean?" I read about tying "The Millstone of a Donkey" around the neck of someone and I ask, "Did anyone ever throw the Millstone of a Donkey in the sea? Well...yes. Herod did. Maybe there are Herod Stories in the NT where no one has looked. Maybe "Honored Friends" is telling us something that happened a long time before Gospel Times. Maybe "Lamb", in Greek, completely loses a Word Play that would be obvious in Hebrew.

Then there is something like this:

John 2: 20 - 21 (RSV):

[20] The Jews then said, "It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and will you raise it up in three days?"
[21] But he spoke of the temple of his body.

Verse 21 is pure trouble. For those who believe, this requires figuring out what "The Temple of his body" means. It cannot mean that Jesus was 46 years old, could it? If not, then get out your abacus and start cipherin'. For others, it may mean that the verse 20 is "inconvenient" and requires an explanation. Someone might look at a particular year, subtract "46 years" from that year and end up in an...awkward spot. "Let's help them by supplying an explanation".

You correctly point out that above the verses I cited is a mention of "Acquila" and "Priscilla". "I grant the whole argument".

So, I'm focused on these verses for a reason: A few years ago, I read through these verses and something *Clicked*, in the manner listed above. "Who is the subject of this Story?" He was extremely knowledgeable about Scripture yet knew nothing. He MAYBE knew about the Baptism of John yet needed to be schooled on the REAL Story: "And when Acquila and Priscilla heard him, they brought him to their house and showed him the Way of the Lord fully...".

Josephus, Antiquities..., 4, 9, 2:

"Moreover, when he heard that Galba was made emperor, he attempted nothing till he also should send him some directions about the war: however, he sent his son Titus to him, to salute him, and to receive his commands about the Jews. Upon the very same errand did king Agrippa sail along with Titus to Galba; but as they were sailing in their long ships by the coasts of Achaia, for it was winter time, they heard that Galba was slain, before they could get to him, after he had reigned seven months and as many days. After whom Otho took the government, and undertook the management of public affairs. So Agrippa resolved to go on to Rome without any terror; on account of the change in the government; but Titus, by a Divine impulse, sailed back from Greece to Syria, and came in great haste to Cesarea, to his father..."

Marker: When Josephus tells of Titus and some "Divine Impulse", look out. Note to gregglaser: Studying the Romans IS depressing, isn't it? Therefore the question is, Is this a Roman Story Insertion? It has the earmarks. Even Latin words and correcting characters who don't act properly. If it is, then we must look to see if there is word sequence that points to something else, a small bit of indirection.

"...while he showed from Scriptures regarding Jesus, that he was the Messiah"

If this is Marcus Agrippa II, the clue is that "...while he showed from Scriptures regarding Jesus that he was the Messiah...".

CW
Shlama Charles,

Are you trying hard not to say what you believe?

I say it's best to get it all out on the table, so we don't sit here trying to decipher your meaning. So, why not just spill all the beans already and get it over with?

Maybe you just like to write your thoughts out? That's fine, but, were does it lead? You seem to feel like you have found some deep truth, but you are afraid of saying exactly what you think you found.

I'm not too sure, yet, but If you don't believe that The Bible is reliable, and written by the Apostles and their helpers, then there are groups who will gladly welcome your criticism of it.

As for what is meant by the statement "But He spoke of the temple of His body"....

It simply means this....that Jesus was telling them that they would crucify Him (destroy His body), but, He would raise it from the dead three days later. The Messiah is the real Temple of God.

And this statement: "...while he showed from Scriptures regarding Jesus, that he was the Messiah"

It simply means that he was showing them where certain prophecies and statements in The Bible (the Old Testament portion) where they are speaking about Jesus, and which prove that He is the promised Messiah that was to come, and whom they were waiting for.


.
Aramaic Wrote:Are you trying hard not to say what you believe?

I'm trying not to offend anyone on this site.

Quote:I say it's best to get it all out on the table, so we don't sit here trying to decipher your meaning. So, why not just spill all the beans already and get it over with?

I did that once with a Post on "The Queen's Eunuch" and I was deeply offensive to thirdwoe. I don't want to do that again. It's not worth it.

Quote:Maybe you just like to write your thoughts out? That's fine, but, were does it lead? You seem to feel like you have found some deep truth, but you are afraid of saying exactly what you think you found.

I don't know what it leads to. I'm still on the journey. Lotsa' people reason from the words and propositions they examine. Many get nowhere. I got to a small Settlement named "Jabnit". It was in "Upper Galilee". The inhabitants were of the Mishmarot Service Group Immer. They believed that the Dynastic Hasmoneans came from them. They spoke Aramaic. Michael Weitzman believed that there was a small group of Aramaic readers and writers from some area "in the same area code", shall we say. Something momentous happened in that area, because of the people there and what they knew. I believe that many of the NT Stories,especially with Peter and Galilee, have to do with Groups that lived in that area. The common thread in all of this is Aramaic and the Peshitta.
[Edit: There is a triviality in what I just said. I believe that the Gospels - especially Mark - are Temple Centered. Most of the action takes place in Jerusalem. To say that "Galilee" is important is not to say that "Galilee is important to Galilee". There is movement from Jerusalem to Galilee and back. Peter is from "Galilee". Immer is from "Upper Galilee". Given a view from Jerusalem, Galilee is important as several Groups - Immer for instance - come from there and travel from Galilee to Jerusalem. Another example: "Go to The Decapolis and tell them how the Lord took pity on you..." The Decapolis is a Real Place and important to the NT Stories. So is "Upper Galilee"]

There is another trail, however, and that is the Roman Story. Acts, f'rinstance. Acts is radioactive, perhaps dangerously so.

Sometimes I need to just be quiet and learn.

Quote:I'm not too sure, yet, but If you don't believe that The Bible is reliable, and written by the Apostles and their helpers, then there are groups who will gladly welcome your criticism of it.

No. Trust me when I tell you. I haven't found that group yet. I know that I will get attacked for anything I Post, from believers, non-believers, atheists and true believers. Wait until you get attacked viciously by someone you just agreed with. Rodney Dangerfield got better treatment.

Quote:As for what is meant by the statement "But He spoke of the temple of His body"....

I understand.

I would be happy to open up a bit if it will be taken with understanding. I do OK with Logic and Form. If I see something, a Herod Story, perhaps, I'll Post. I'm not, however, going to mess up a good Forum. It's not worth it.

CW