Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Clarity on the definition of "Hebrew" as in Acts 22:2
#3
I should have quoted the English translation of the Aramaic. But I will right now. How is Acts 1:19 significant to this issue?

Acts 1:19 (Etheridge); "And this has been known of all who dwell in JERUSALEM, and so is called IN THE LANGUAGE OF THE COUNTRY 'Hakel-damo,' the interpretation of which is, 'A field of blood.' "

But here is Lamsa on Acts 1:19 (He seems to attempt to be more specific or add to it for some reason); Lamsa, Acts 1:19, "And this very thing is known to all who dwell in JERUSALEM; so that the field is called IN THE LANGUAGE OF THE COUNTRY - 'Khakal-Dema,' whic is to say "Koriathdem,' the field of blood."

Is Peter basically doing the same thing as the writer John (John 1:41, John 1:42, John 5:2, John 19:13 and John 19:17) ??

Kindly,

Mike
Reply


Messages In This Thread
Re: Clarity on the definition of "Hebrew" as in Acts 22:2 - by Mike Kar - 05-06-2013, 05:11 PM

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)