01-29-2014, 02:21 PM
Shlama Akhi Bram
I think you raise valid questions. They are very important to consider. Not because Jesus didn't speak an obscure dialect as his "home" dialect (much the same way modern Aramaic speakers do.) but because of the assumption that this home dialect was the only one, or that this home dialect was what the NT must have been committed to in writing.
As you might know, at "home" I speak the Mazraa sub-dialect of the Tkhuma tribe from the Hakkari mountains in Turkey. As hillbilly a dialect of modern Neo-Aramaic as you can find. But that's not what I speak outside the "home", unless it's with fellow Mazraa-naye. I either speak the koine dialect of Assyrian Iraqi Koine, or Urmi, or Tyari, or whomever I'm with's dialect.
Jesus and the Apostles did the same thing. The scripture verify this. It's impossible to have preached to the Syrians, Lebanese, Mesopotamians, Judeans, Galileans, etc. in one single dialect. Pentecost would have been impossible.
+Shamasha
I think you raise valid questions. They are very important to consider. Not because Jesus didn't speak an obscure dialect as his "home" dialect (much the same way modern Aramaic speakers do.) but because of the assumption that this home dialect was the only one, or that this home dialect was what the NT must have been committed to in writing.
As you might know, at "home" I speak the Mazraa sub-dialect of the Tkhuma tribe from the Hakkari mountains in Turkey. As hillbilly a dialect of modern Neo-Aramaic as you can find. But that's not what I speak outside the "home", unless it's with fellow Mazraa-naye. I either speak the koine dialect of Assyrian Iraqi Koine, or Urmi, or Tyari, or whomever I'm with's dialect.
Jesus and the Apostles did the same thing. The scripture verify this. It's impossible to have preached to the Syrians, Lebanese, Mesopotamians, Judeans, Galileans, etc. in one single dialect. Pentecost would have been impossible.
+Shamasha