Cornelius in Acts 10

[Paul Younan]

January 30, 2009

It looks to me as if the Aramaic text of Acts 10: 1-3 were based on the Greek text.

The man???s name was ???Cornelie???. In Greek a male name ending in a vowel has a sigma ending in the nominative case. Hence it is written ???Cornelios??? in verse 1 to adhere to proper Greek grammar. In both cases it is translated the same into English, ???Cornelius??? .

The same story applies the reason the Messiah???s name varies in the Greek text. It is Yeshua in Aramaic. In Greek it becomes Iesou in the objective case and Iesous in the nominative case. Here are some variations in Greek based upon grammar rules.

Luke 1: 16 Iesous
Luke 1: 25 Iesoun
Luke 8: 34 Iesou

It is customary to translate all of these into English as ???Jesus???. That's also why "Barabba" is called "Barabbas" in the English BIble.

Since the Aramaic text seems to follow the Greek grammar rules, it looks to me as if the Aramaic is a translation of a Greek text in this portion of Acts.

Is there another explanation?

Otto

Shlama Akhi Otto,

Actually in 10:3 the Greek is in the Vocative (Nominative for Address, ("Cornelie!") The Vocative Case is the case of direct address....that the person is being addressed and that form of address is in a sense a title.

In any case, in ancient Greek and Latin, the masculine name normally ending in Sigma can (but not necessarily) drop the final Sigma when in the Vocative. Cornelius was a Latin, in fact 10:1 tells us that he belonged to the Italian Regiment. His name is Latin as well.

Whether or not the angel addressed him in Greek or Latin, is irrelevant anyway since both would drop the final Sigma in his name when directly addressing him. That an angel addressed Cornelius, a Latin man, in Aramaic can be ruled out by common sense. I highly doubt an occupying soldier like Cornelius knew Aramaic any better than an American soldier in Afghanistan knows the Afghan tongue.

Aramaic (actually all Semitic tongues) lack a special grammatical category for the Vocative. Rather, when someone is being addressed it is proper to do so in the Emphatic case ("[O] Cornelius!"). In the Emphatic case, the state of nouns change. For instance, "Ab" (father) becomes "Aba"...."Beth" (house) becomes "Betha"...as you can see, the difference is the appending of a final Aleph.

Which is what you find not only in Acts 10:3 when directly addressing Cornelius in the Emphatic "Qornelia" (Cornelee in Greek Vocative), but also in Acts 1:1 where you have Theophilus being addressed in the Emphatic "Tawpeela" (Theophilee in Greek Vocative).

In other words, you are seeing both the Greek and Aramaic (and even Latin for that matter), behave properly within their own grammatical rules.

But again, I don't think Cornelius would have been well versed enough in Aramaic, the dialogue here probably occurred in Greek or most likely in Latin.