Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
John 19:19 (YHWH?)
Paul Younan Wrote:
Dawid Wrote:You have completely disregarded the other reference that I mentioned. Please go back and see what I wrote. they said it was better to cut up your children and feed them to pigs than to teach them Greek.

I haven't disregarded it Akhi, I've actually quoted that passage on this forum for several years now.

To them it was better to feed their children pork than to teach them Greek.

Nevertheless, they still would rather have had Greek being spoken than Aramaic. The preference was Hebrew, and if not then Greek....the nationalists didn't want Aramaic, it was too close to Hebrew and threatened to swallow it up (which it did).

It was an insult to Aramaic, an intended insult, when Greek was mentioned as a secondary preference next to Hebrew.

Be that as it may, the important thing is what Dave mentioned - in order for this to have even come up as an issue, you know the vernacular of the land was Aramaic.

There's no other option here for any reasonable person.
That's silly! Just a little later the spiritual descendants of these guys would be writing the Talmud in Aramaic. Parts of the TN"K, as you have so often pointed out, were written in Aramaic. The point was the same as the one made in G'linah, "I would that you were hot or cold..." They were saying you should either speak Lashon HaQodesh or become completely apostate and Hellenized.

Glad to know that I'm not reasonable. <!-- sWink --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/wink1.gif" alt="Wink" title="Wink" /><!-- sWink -->

Paul Younan Wrote:
Dawid Wrote:I beg to differ. This was during the Hebrew revival. Hebrew was being brought back to life, and this was an argument for speaking Hebrew. Much like the later Hebrew revival, it took a while. It was a contention to those who were speaking Aramaic that they ought to join those speaking Hebrew.

The few people speaking Mishnaic Hebrew (note, not Biblical Hebrew) were a minority, Akhi.

No matter how you spin this, none of Messiah's words as preserved in even the Greek manuscripts is Mishnaic (or Biblical) Hebrew. They are Aramaic.
I already gave a logical reason for the Mashiakh's words being in Aramaic in the Greek texts. Unfortunately, you appeared to be incapable of comprehending my argument.

For the difference between Biblical and Mishnaic Hebrew, I pointed some of this out before. It was influenced by Aramaic, for one. It is clear that it is the result of a revival of Hebrew, since it is essentially Aramaicized Hebrew.

Dawid Wrote:The point was the same as the one made in G'linah, "I would that you were hot or cold..." They were saying you should either speak Lashon HaQodesh or become completely apostate and Hellenized.

Which means what? The majority were speaking neither Lashon HaQodesh, nor Greek.....right?

"Why Aramaic", was the question.

This seems obvious to everyone here on this forum, but you. The people spoke Aramaic. I'm not talking about the zealots who wrote the Mishnah, the minority who were trying to resurrect some sort of neo-Hebrew.

I'm talking about the masses....the same ones they are complaining about when asking the immensely important, "Why Aramaic?"

You don't ask if the problem don't exist. You don't write about it unless it's a significant problem.

If everyone was happily speaking neo-Hebrew (Mishnaic) then the Rebbe wouldn't have complained about it in writing.

I fail to see how this supports your position that the language spoken in the Holy Land during the 1st-century was Mishnaic Hebrew. It actually supports the Aramaic position.
Mr. Younan, "everyone" only means "Paul Younan." I'm certain that if you ask anyone who is actually familiar with Rabbinic literature they will agree with me.
Dawid Wrote:Mr. Younan, "everyone" only means "Paul Younan."

I guess you must have missed Dave Bauscher's and Yaaqub's posts in this thread. Go back and take a look.
I do agree that Yeshua's language was Aramaic, however writers of the New Testament wrote their first statement in Greek the more common language at that time. That is why John 20:16 in your translation gives us an explanation what word Rabbuni means. Normally in Aramaic you do not need interpretation of this word at all. You know simply that Rabbuni, or Rabuli means 'Master' or 'Teacher'. That is why your translation and Lamsa's translation is based on later Syriac manuscripts who have been translated out of Greek manuscripts by Syriac community into Aramaic with Syrian letters. There is possibility that Matthew wrote his gospel in Hebrew,but we have not got this gospel in our findings.

I think the issue with these ping-pong matches in general, although, it's really just one sided, (as there are those that know intimately since birth (and speak) the languages at hand, and those that don't), is that when dealing with the things of Meshikha, we meet a dividing line - Where we have a natural mind's "knowledge" on one side and spiritual focus (1 Cor 2:14) on the other... and often the two do not walk the same road with the same goals. For the one, the goal is to be "right", often in the sight of man, for the other, it is the Truth, often far from the public view. But to come to the knowledge of the Truth, (2 Tim 3:7) what a great and rare thing. And to know that Truth is not something to be held in our minds and so easily regurgitated (or copied and pasted from another's written ideas), but a life that is expressed, which requires an intimacy lost in such discussions.

Whereas, if we place the lives of those who are in the discussion under the light of the discussion, I think the whole topic would become far more relevant... as we are seeing from this lively chat... Hebrew was not a language for Abraham... but a choice. And so it remains today. Those who make the choice, often speak Aramaic <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile --> Thankfully, Abba's Word is settled forever in Shemayim, and so I have no doubt, that He is well able to dislodge the rocks from the rivers of our language discussions we have together as we walk into His light.

I will sum it up with this:

Avoid those foolish discussions which afford no instruction; for you know that they generate arguments. And a servant of our Master you should not contend with, (GRANTED, MOST AREN'T HIS SERVANTS BUT THEIR OWN) but to be mild towards everyone and instructive and patient, that with mildness he may enlighten those who dispute against him if perhaps Elohim may give them repentance and they may acknowledge the truth, and may recollect themselves and may escape out of the snare of satan, at whose pleasure they have been ensnared.

And so we are now in the realm of "perhaps"... we shall see.

Thankfully, YHWH knows those who are truly His.

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)