Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
John 19:19 (YHWH?)
#46
Dawid Wrote:But don't you know what Jews believe about Hebrew? It is Lashon HaQodesh, the language that God used to speak the universe into being. Aramaic sprang up at the Tower of Babel. Before that, everyone spoke Hebrew. We <!-- s:inlove: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/inlove.gif" alt=":inlove:" title="In Love" /><!-- s:inlove: --> Hebrew. <!-- s:lol: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/laugh.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laugh" /><!-- s:lol: -->

I do indeed know that Jews believe that about Hebrew. Muslims believe the same thing about Arabic.

Funny thing is neither Hebrew nor Arabic existed before Hebrews and Arabs, who descended from Abraham the Chaldean.

And both of you use a script descended from Aramaic. You even all it "Ktav Ashuri" ("Assyrian writing").

That being said, unless you can find some archaeological evidence (ahem, clay tablets) from Mesopotamia during the time that Abraham lived among his fellow Beth-Nahrainites, showing a sample of Hebrew speech/writing, excuse me while I rank your belief about the Hebrew language being spoken by Adam right up there with Rudolf the red-nosed Reindeer and the Easter Bunny. <!-- s:biggrin: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/biggrin.gif" alt=":biggrin:" title="Big Grin" /><!-- s:biggrin: -->

I feel ya, though. There's a lot to be said about cultural pride. I've been accused of it several times in the past.
Reply
#47
Dawid Wrote:But don't you know what Jews believe about Hebrew? It is Lashon HaQodesh, the language that God used to speak the universe into being. Aramaic sprang up at the Tower of Babel. Before that, everyone spoke Hebrew. We <!-- s:inlove: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/inlove.gif" alt=":inlove:" title="In Love" /><!-- s:inlove: --> Hebrew. <!-- s:lol: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/laugh.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laugh" /><!-- s:lol: -->

Which Hebrew? There have been a number of languages/dialects called "Hebrew." Modern Hebrew? Medieval Hebrew? Several dialects of Jewish Aramaic? Ah no, you must mean Biblical Hebrew. In either case, I think I just demonstrated that the name "Hebrew" isn't reserved for a specific, defined, single language. I could make up some random space language right now, call it "Hebrew," and claim all other languages derived from it.

For all we know, by "Hebrew" the Torah could mean "Proto-Semitic." How do you know for sure?

Paul, this is exactly what you were saying in another thread about Assyrians calling their language "Assyrian" when it's really Aramaic, 1st century Jews calling their language "Hebrew" when it was really Aramaic, and so on.
Reply
#48
I think it is safe to say that Hebrew existed well before there were "Hebrews." For instance, we can be certain that Ya'aqov spoke Hebrew, since he named the mountain in Hebrew, and Yitro named it in Aramaic. So by this time it was either fully developed or had at least begun to develope.
The question is, why were they called "Hebrews"? Presumeably, they were named after 'Iver. Why? They were only one of the many descendants of 'Iver. I like to think it is because they spoke the language of 'Iver.

You yourself pointed out that we didn't always use the Ashuri script. You might as well suggest that Hebrew is based on Phonecian since Phonecian used the Paleo Hebrew script. We know from the DSS, various inscriptions, and even the Talmud that we did not always use the Ashuri script.

lol! You have more cultural pride than even the most ardent Zionists!
Reply
#49
Karl Wrote:
Dawid Wrote:But don't you know what Jews believe about Hebrew? It is Lashon HaQodesh, the language that God used to speak the universe into being. Aramaic sprang up at the Tower of Babel. Before that, everyone spoke Hebrew. We <!-- s:inlove: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/inlove.gif" alt=":inlove:" title="In Love" /><!-- s:inlove: --> Hebrew. <!-- s:lol: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/laugh.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laugh" /><!-- s:lol: -->

Which Hebrew? There have been a number of languages/dialects called "Hebrew." Modern Hebrew? Medieval Hebrew? Several dialects of Jewish Aramaic? Ah no, you must mean Biblical Hebrew. In either case, I think I just demonstrated that the name "Hebrew" isn't reserved for a specific, defined, single language. I could make up some random space language right now, call it "Hebrew," and claim all other languages derived from it.

For all we know, by "Hebrew" the Torah could mean "Proto-Semitic." How do you know for sure?

Paul, this is exactly what you were saying in another thread about Assyrians calling their language "Assyrian" when it's really Aramaic, 1st century Jews calling their language "Hebrew" when it was really Aramaic, and so on.
One could say the same thing of Aramaic, English, German, and even Greek for that matter. What else is new? Of course I mean Biblical Hebrew. What else is called Lashon HaQodesh?
I must strike you guys as really daft, since y'all seem determined to point out the obvious to me. <!-- s:lol: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/laugh.gif" alt=":lol:" title="Laugh" /><!-- s:lol: --> Of course you are all vastly more qualified than I am, but I'm not completely ignorant. <!-- sWink --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/wink1.gif" alt="Wink" title="Wink" /><!-- sWink --> Just close. <!-- s:biggrin: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/biggrin.gif" alt=":biggrin:" title="Big Grin" /><!-- s:biggrin: -->
Reply
#50
We're just having fun with you Dawid, we razzle pretty much all new comers. Welcome.

BTW - we call you "Abareh" because you "passed over", or crossed the river Euphrates over to the other side from your original home .... you Iraqi in denial, you.
Reply
#51
Karl Wrote:Paul, this is exactly what you were saying in another thread about Assyrians calling their language "Assyrian" when it's really Aramaic, 1st century Jews calling their language "Hebrew" when it was really Aramaic, and so on.

Thas wat I'm sayin'

It is Hebrew, Assyrian, Aramean, Chaldean, Syriac, Mandean. So many names for one language.

It's whatever someone wants it to be.

If to the Apostle John, the word "Golgotha", is Hebrew....so be it.....Hebrew it is. Who are we to say otherwise? We today who call it "Assyrian."

I think, personally, that we need to make it more clear that by the word "Ibrayith", in Aramaic, we could mean one of two different things.

"Ibrayith" can refer to this language from Mars that Dawid is referring to, the language of the Old Testament.

"Ibrayith" can also refer to a dialect of Aramaic.

For example, your modern dialect is "Tyarith", whilst mine is "Tkhumaith", etc.

"Ibrayith" in the NT refers to the dialect spoken in southern Judea, which was slightly different from the dialect of those northern territories closer to Syria, like Galilee/Samaria.

Anyway, enough of this.....

Dawid, if it helps, instead of calling it Aramaic....just think of it as really old Hebrew. <!-- sWink --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/wink1.gif" alt="Wink" title="Wink" /><!-- sWink -->
Reply
#52
Dawid Wrote:You yourself pointed out that we didn't always use the Ashuri script. You might as well suggest that Hebrew is based on Phonecian since Phonecian used the Paleo Hebrew script. We know from the DSS, various inscriptions, and even the Talmud that we did not always use the Ashuri script.

It goes back to what I said, there's very little originality to Hebrew. It never had a distinct script, no. First they used the Phoenician, then they switched over to the "Assyrian". Do you know why they called it "Assyrian" - take a looksey at the image below from Hatra in Assyria:

[Image: hatra79b.gif]

Look familiar? That's how they wrote in Hatra, in Nineveh province, Assyria. Modern-day Iraq.

That's "Ktav-Ashuri".

Dawid Wrote:lol! You have more cultural pride than even the most ardent Zionists!

You forget that Aramaic is an adopted language to us Assyrians, as well. We didn't originally speak this language of you nomad types from the desert. I have enough cultural pride to know Akkadian is long dead.

This Aramaic is your language more than it is ours. Your ancestors were Arameans.....mine were Akkadian.

Do you see any glorifying of anything Assyrian here? Do you see the Assyrian flag, winged bulls?

Did I make a site dedicated to the Epic of Gilgamesh, or to the words of a Jewish Messiah?

Is the logo I have on the front page the name of a pagan Assyrian deity, or is that the unspeakable name of God as represented by the Tanakh?

If I have pride in anything, it's in the language of your Aramean ancestors, not mine. That we still have the words of the Jewish Messiah intact, not in some long-lost Hebrew version, but a living scripture that has survived unimaginable holocausts and bloodshed to be preserved for us today.

In any case, modern-day Hebrew was resurrected, for the most part, after the creation of the state of Israel. You seem to ignore the fact that in order for something to have been resurrected, a sane person must logically presume that it died sometime before 1948.

All evidence points to the captivities as to when the Hebrew language we know from the scripture for all intents and purposes ceased to be used as a vernacular of the common masses....and then eventually everyone. It became a liturgical language, like Latin in the Catholic Church today.

Yes, people still read and wrote in it...basically copying existing things like scripture. But they didn't go to the market and ask "how much for those pigeons?" in the old tongue of Moses. Otherwise they wouldn't have had a need for a meturgeman at shul.

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.j...&artid=523
Reply
#53
Paul Younan Wrote:We're just having fun with you Dawid, we razzle pretty much all new comers. Welcome.
lol. Thank you. I feel loved now. <!-- s:biggrin: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/biggrin.gif" alt=":biggrin:" title="Big Grin" /><!-- s:biggrin: -->

Paul Younan Wrote:BTW - we call you "Abareh" because you "passed over", or crossed the river Euphrates over to the other side from your original home .... you Iraqi in denial, you.
Isn't that mentioned in the TaNaKH, even? I think I recall that it is somewhere mentioned that we are called Abareh.
Iraqi in denial? Then for that matter, Iraqis are just Sumerians in denial, and Sumerians are just Medes in denial, since Har Arata is in Media. <!-- sTongue --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/poketoungeb.gif" alt="Tongue" title="Poke Tounge" /><!-- sTongue -->
Reply
#54
Paul Younan Wrote:
Dawid Wrote:You yourself pointed out that we didn't always use the Ashuri script. You might as well suggest that Hebrew is based on Phonecian since Phonecian used the Paleo Hebrew script. We know from the DSS, various inscriptions, and even the Talmud that we did not always use the Ashuri script.

It goes back to what I said, there's very little originality to Hebrew. It never had a distinct script, no. First they used the Phoenician, then they switched over to the "Assyrian". Do you know why they called it "Assyrian" - take a looksey at the image below from Hatra in Assyria:

[Image: hatra79b.gif]

Look familiar? That's how they wrote in Hatra, in Nineveh province, Assyria. Modern-day Iraq.

That's "Ktav-Ashuri".
I'm not denying that the square script is Aramaic. I know. I've read the Talmud (well, not all of it, but you know what I mean). We picked up the Aramaic script during the Babylonian exile.
I am going to disagree with you on the idea that we originally used the Phonecian script. I think they used ours.

Paul Younan Wrote:
Dawid Wrote:lol! You have more cultural pride than even the most ardent Zionists!

You forget that Aramaic is an adopted language to us Assyrians, as well. We didn't originally speak this language of you nomad types from the desert. I have enough cultural pride to know Akkadian is long dead.

This Aramaic is your language more than it is ours. Your ancestors were Arameans.....mine were Akkadian.
lol. Well, if you want to get technical about it, most of my ancestors are probably barbaric Russian and Germanic tribes, since I'm Ashkenazi. Somewhere along the lines they converted and intermarried with real Jews.

Paul Younan Wrote:Do you see any glorifying of anything Assyrian here? Do you see the Assyrian flag, winged bulls?

Did I make a site dedicated to the Epic of Gilgamesh, or to the words of a Jewish Messiah?

Is the logo I have on the front page the name of a pagan Assyrian deity, or is that the unspeakable name of God as represented by the Tanakh?

If I have pride in anything, it's in the language of your Aramean ancestors, not mine. That we still have the words of the Jewish Messiah intact, not in some long-lost Hebrew version, but a living scripture that has survived unimaginable holocausts and bloodshed to be preserved for us today.

In any case, modern-day Hebrew was resurrected, for the most part, after the creation of the state of Israel. You seem to ignore the fact that in order for something to have been resurrected, a sane person must logically presume that it died sometime before 1948.

All evidence points to the captivities as to when the Hebrew language we know from the scripture for all intents and purposes ceased to be used as a vernacular of the common masses....and then eventually everyone. It became a liturgical language, like Latin in the Catholic Church today.

Yes, people still read and wrote in it...basically copying existing things like scripture. But they didn't go to the market and ask "how much for those pigeons?" in the old tongue of Moses. Otherwise they wouldn't have had a need for a meturgeman at shul.

http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/view.j...&artid=523
I'm not ignoring the fact that it was declared clinically dead a long time ago. I'm simply quibbling over the date. I would say that it's death is closer to the Roman exile than to the Babylonian exile. Certainly it died, but it must have been spoken again, or the dialect of Mishnaic Hebrew never would have come into existence. If you are right, then the Mishnah would have been written in a more classical, Biblical Hebrew form. (DSS and Siloam) that they attempted to resurrect the Paleo script.
Sure, it died when they were in exile, but was resurrected when they returned to the land. It's even recorded in the Mishnah, one of the Tanaim asking why anyone would speak Aramaic in the land. If they're going to speak anything, it should be Hebrew. If they don't speak Hebrew, they might aswell speak Greek.

Shalom,
Dawid
Reply
#55
Dawid Wrote:It's even recorded in the Mishnah, one of the Tanaim asking why anyone would speak Aramaic in the land.

That means that the Mishnah was complaining about the fact that Aramaic was the vernacular of the land, right?
Reply
#56
Paul Younan Wrote:
Dawid Wrote:It's even recorded in the Mishnah, one of the Tanaim asking why anyone would speak Aramaic in the land.

That means that the Mishnah was complaining about the fact that Aramaic was the vernacular of the land, right?
That's not the way I understood it, but I could have been wrong. I'd need to go back and look at the whole passage. I don't really remember the context.
Reply
#57
Here's the exact quote:

Quote:???In the land of Israel, why the Aramaic tongue? Either the Holy Tongue or the Greek tongue???
(Tracate Sotah 49 b)

If the question is being posed, it's obvious the Rebbe were annoyed by the fact that Aramaic was the vernacular. Otherwise, why reprimand people over it?
Reply
#58
Shalom Akhi Dawid,

This is more of a psychological question to you, why do you suppose that the ultra-nationalist type in the 1st century would rather the people speak Greek, than Aramaic? <!-- s:tellme: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/tellme.gif" alt=":tellme:" title="Tell Me" /><!-- s:tellme: -->

Trick question here....think about this carefully before answering.
Reply
#59
Hey Rafa,

Welcome to the forum brother.

I don't want to mislead you here with our tone, this isn't a question of superiority although someone who hasn't read this forum before, and who isn't familiar with how I make my point sometimes, may get that (incorrect) impression.

There isn't anything "superior" or particularly admirable about any of these language over the language of Zimbabwe, Mongolia or France.

That being said, the issue here is of extreme importance because what many people may not realize is the hidden danger in this "Hebrew Primacy" movement. To me, Hebrew and Aramaic are one and the same. I don't care which the NT was written in, if it were Hebrew and if Meshikha spoke Hebrew, this website would be about Hebrew.

However, the danger lies in the fact that this movement is nothing short of a Trojan Horse sent by the Greeks, as a counter-attack to the Aramaic primacy movement.

They realize fully that they cannot answer our examples with the Greek, so they invent a movement that is really Greek in Hebrew dress. Ultimately, there is no Hebrew version that dates back to the apostolic period that remains in our possession. That becomes crucial when you think about how that undermines any position, like ours, that is opposed to the Greek.

You will notice, with very little exception, that any "Hebrew" based movement...whether within the relatively recent "Messianic Judaism" context, or this "Hebrew Primacy" of the NT nonsense.....ultimately originates with Greek Primacists, primarily those of the American Evangelical fold.

They are trying to convert Jews to Christianity....their particular branch, of course, by sneaking in these types of tricks. Real Jews, however, can smell this conspiracy and spot it right away.

Others, unfortunately, are more than happy with a basically KJV-bible with some Hebrew names sprinkled here and there.

Ultimately, an Aramaic Peshitta that demonstrates the Greek version is a translation upsets the balance....foils their plans.

So while this may seem like a trivial discussion revolving around "my language is better than yours", trust me when I say it is of utmost importance for those of us who are trying to slay the Greek dragon and what Hellenism has done to this Semitic Faith.
Reply
#60
Paul Younan Wrote:Shalom Akhi Dawid,

This is more of a psychological question to you, why do you suppose that the ultra-nationalist type in the 1st century would rather the people speak Greek, than Aramaic? <!-- s:tellme: --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/tellme.gif" alt=":tellme:" title="Tell Me" /><!-- s:tellme: -->

Trick question here....think about this carefully before answering.
I see the trap, but I still have to answer honestly. Hellenism was the threat in the first century, so Aramaic would naturally be preferable. If Babylonian culture and religion had been the threat, Greek would have most likely been preferable. Whatever it takes to stave off assimilation.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)