12-15-2007, 07:42 PM
brantana Wrote:Paul,
Thanks! Now, I won't concede that Hebrew was completely dead in those days (unlike Akkadian), considering the Tanakh was/is still read; however, I enjoyed your post. Are there other scriptural references like the one you noted where Aramaic is referred to as "Hebrew" or is Yukhanan 19:13 the singular occurrence?
Shukran jazeelan!
-b
Hi Brantana,
In the NT, whenever you read the word "Hebrew", it's really Aramaic.
Yukhanan 5:2 (Bethesda, "place of mercy")
Yukhanan 19:17 (Golgotha, "skull")
Yukhanan 20:17, (Rabuli, "my teacher")
In Acts 1:19, you have a very clear indication of what the "language of the country of Jerusalem" was. "Khaqel-Dama" is Aramaic, not Hebrew.
Tanakh has always been "read" and "written" in the old Hebrew....up until this very day, but there's a big difference between being read/written and being spoken as an everyday, living, vernacular.
By "dead", I did not mean that no one read or wrote it. I meant that no one communicated in it.