12-08-2007, 05:20 PM
Hi Dave,
When talking about Hebrew and Aramaic, it's such a fine line anyway. The two are so close that you can almost find the same root behind mistranslations, split-words, etc. as the two languages would share the same common root word 60-70% of the time.
I agree that Hebrew Primacy would leave us at a considerable disadvantage when presented with the rather lacking NT manuscript tradition.
Perhaps it is, in part at least, a counter-attack by the Greek Primacists to attempt to neutralize our arguments.
The problem is, this language they spoke in 1st century Israel is, to them, "Hebrew." That's what they called it. It's not the same "Hebrew" that Moses penned Genesis in, but we Assyrians even called their language "Hebrew".
Even today, when we speak of Iraqi Jews who lived in villages next to us and with whom we could easily converse in Aramaic, their dialect and accent is called "Hebrew" (Ibraith) simply because that's the language of the Hebrews.
Likewise, our dialect and accent is called, by them, "Ashurith" - "Assyrian", even though it's not the same Assyrian as in the Akkadian tablets.
So, they can go ahead and call it "Hebrew" - it is "Hebrew". Just like our language today in the modern dialect we speak is "Assyrian". Even though they are both technically Aramaic.
Does that make sense?
When talking about Hebrew and Aramaic, it's such a fine line anyway. The two are so close that you can almost find the same root behind mistranslations, split-words, etc. as the two languages would share the same common root word 60-70% of the time.
I agree that Hebrew Primacy would leave us at a considerable disadvantage when presented with the rather lacking NT manuscript tradition.
Perhaps it is, in part at least, a counter-attack by the Greek Primacists to attempt to neutralize our arguments.
The problem is, this language they spoke in 1st century Israel is, to them, "Hebrew." That's what they called it. It's not the same "Hebrew" that Moses penned Genesis in, but we Assyrians even called their language "Hebrew".
Even today, when we speak of Iraqi Jews who lived in villages next to us and with whom we could easily converse in Aramaic, their dialect and accent is called "Hebrew" (Ibraith) simply because that's the language of the Hebrews.
Likewise, our dialect and accent is called, by them, "Ashurith" - "Assyrian", even though it's not the same Assyrian as in the Akkadian tablets.
So, they can go ahead and call it "Hebrew" - it is "Hebrew". Just like our language today in the modern dialect we speak is "Assyrian". Even though they are both technically Aramaic.
Does that make sense?