Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Chiastic Structures in Mark
#16
distazo Wrote:Paul,

Can you please look at my sample at Revelation? Is that a poem?

Thanks!

Shlama Akhi Distazo,

I'm not sure why you're asking me about a poetic structure in Revelation, as I am not fluent enough in Greek to be able to recognize it. I'm sure Greek scholars have identified it as a poem, although I am not sure of the specifics of it.

The Aramaic you have from the translation the SOC made is unfamiliar to me and does not appear to be poetic in any Semitic sense or prose. What exactly are you noticing that is poetic about it ?

+Shamasha
#17
Paul Younan Wrote:In other words, being a collection of historical books and epistles, I would not expect to find any acrostic poems in the Aramaic NT. any more than in 2Kings or Josephus.

Hi Paul,

Though off-topic, according to D. Bauscher, the verse I quoted, is a poem. Not acrostic. And I did not refer to Greek but to the Aramaic.

Quote:The end of every line rhymes with every other line
(lines 1 & 3;;lines 2 & 4))..Rhyme,, however,, is not the
feature to look for in Semitic poetry;;look for meter and
metaphor,, parallel words and imagery.. This has all of
these elements.. First,, it recalls Psalm 23--a Song about
The Shepherd guiding the sheep ((not ice the irony of
The Lamb being The Shepherd)) beside still waters..
Here,, the waters represent Life itself,, which His people
may drink directly.. The Aramaic words anye -ayna -
?Eyes? and atnye -ayntha -?Fountains? are the same
word in different genders and applications.. We have
?Waters? and ?Tears? as parallel words;; Lamb &
Shepherd are also parallel and yet present a paradox;;
indeed each parallelism is a paradox:: Eyes are
fountains, but the springs of water comfort the grief
that produces tears from the eyes..The tears represent
sorrow;;the waters represent life and jjoy;; The Lamb
represents a helpless victim and sacrifice for sin;;The
Shepherd represents The LORD Himself--both are The
same Messiah Yeshua..?Emra?--?Lamb? & ?Nera?-
?Shepherd? are two of the first rhyming words at the
beginning of the first two lines.. ?Nalha?--?Wipes
away? also rhymes with ?Nera? & ?Emra?,, and is the
first word on the last line,, and is the second of two
actions performed by The Lamb in this verse..

He adds that the Harklean Syriac does not feature this poem. Only the Crawfor Revelation.

This version of Revelation is viewable in Dukhrana.com (it cannot quite be unfamiliar for you, right? <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile --> )
#18
Shlama Akhi Distazo.

I pay very little attention to Dave Bauscher in this regard, because he is not a native speaker and doesn't know what he is talking about in this case.

Semitic poetry has nothing to do with rhyme. Our poems don't rhyme.

Semitic poetry is about alliteration/assonance, syllabic metre, acrostics, word plays and orthographic parallelism.

Disregarding his claims about rhyme (which doesn't exist since almost every emphatic noun rhymes in Aramaic), there are no orthographic parallelisms, alliteration, acrostics, syllabic metre or assonance within this passage of the Aramaic translation of the Greek book of Revelation.

Which words in the supposed wordplays above are related orthographically in your opinion, in order to justify the claim of parallelism? What relation does the Aramaic word for tear (demaa) and the Aramaic word for water (maya) have ? Why relation orthographically do the Aramaic word for lamb (emra) and shepherd (raaya) have ?

Where is the alliteration and assonance that he claims?

With regards to your point about dukhrana, I don't need to read a translation of the book of Revelation on a website. If I desire to read a Greek book, I go to the Greek book itself and study it. I've rarely had that inclination, because to me the book of Revelation is how you would view the Book of Mormon. It's simply not part of our tradition, and I have no opinion on it otherwise. For the book of Revelation, I am a Greek Primacist, for whatever that is worth. We simply do not use the book for anything.

If you feel the book of Revelation had an Aramaic original to it, then show me real examples. I don't see it at all in chapter 7, perhaps the expert of Aramaic poetry Mr. Bauscher can point it out, so I can go show the Patriarch and elder speakers of the language how they've been missing out on some fantastic poetry all these years. <!-- sWink --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/wink1.gif" alt="Wink" title="Wink" /><!-- sWink -->

+Shamasha
#19
Hi Paul,

Why do you use two standards? Tradition, ok, that's an argument I understand, but...

you cannot put away the book, and compare it even to the book of Mormon, which is clearly a fraud! John simply wrote Gelyana to -his- 7 congregations in ASIA but not to Babylon, and after the 22 books where given to the East. It's quite simple, I think.

But the same arguments for Crawford Syriac, applies to any of the 22 books which are claimed to have an Aramaic origin.
All arguments that you and others say about, say the gospels, can be applied to the Crawford codex.

For instance, no other book from the 27 canon, is more jewish in style (not greek!) than revelation. It's full of Aramisms. It also (contrary to the Greek) is great in grammar (according to Bauscher). If you have any proof, that the grammar of (Crawford) Gelyana is sloppy and a translation of Greek, just show me <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile -->

About poetry. Maybe when you saw 'Bauscher' did you stop reading? He says the same about rhyme. 'do not look for rhyme' ...

I think the verse does have Aramaic wordplay.

To give an answer about an original: 2:22 "I shall throw her in a bed". The Aramaic word however can be translated both as bed as 'coffin'. The correct translation should be: "I shall throw her in a coffin". There are a lot of readings which (if retranslated) make a lot more sense than out of Greek.

Another: 5:3
?L?kethava w?lamashra
Tabaway w?lamakhzay?

Harklean and Greek misses this.

But brother, let me not ruin your day! Have a blessed new year!
#20
Shlama Akhi,

You have a blessed New Year as well.

I'm not interested in bringing up tradition. I'm interested in the original topic of a poem in chapter 7.

I realize that Bauscher mentioned that "rhyme" isn't something we should look for. (Although he mentioned "rhyme" a lot, anyway, which reveals either unintentional ignorance, or intentional deceit.)

He mentions meter and wordplays.

Now, my challenge to you is to show it to me. Show me the metre in the Crawford codex of chapter 7, in Aramaic. Or the wordplays.

Imagery does not count. Imagery is present in any language.

With regards to bed/coffin (Aramaic arsa) the word is the same, because in ancient times there was no such thing as a coffin we use today. The dead were strapped to a bed, literally. Either translation makes sense culturally.

But before we go into a thousand different topics, let's stay on this alleged poetry on chapter seven. I want to see it. So far, all I see is his insistence on rhyme (even though he said to pay no attention to it) and imagery (which isn't limited to any one language.)

+Shamasha
#21
Paul,

I am not experienced enough to recognize poetic elements, however, I do understand them.

A typical Jewish play is something like: "The painter painted the painting..." (However, this is English, but it demonstrates originality)
Revelation 5:1 has something like "sealed with seven seals". Seven is shaba in Aramaic.
So it says: "Tabaya taba shaba"

You wanted one example, I give you one which I understand myself. I will not defend the writings on chapter seven from Bauscher. Maybe he indeed is wrong. And being a native speaker or not, sorry with all respect to you, but that's really not an argument. I know people who learned a new language in 6 months without accent.
#22
distazo Wrote:Paul,

I am not experienced enough to recognize poetic elements, however, I do understand them.

A typical Jewish play is something like: "The painter painted the painting..." (However, this is English, but it demonstrates originality)
Revelation 5:1 has something like "sealed with seven seals". Seven is shaba in Aramaic.
So it says: "Tabaya taba shaba"

You wanted one example, I give you one which I understand myself. I will not defend the writings on chapter seven from Bauscher. Maybe he indeed is wrong. And being a native speaker or not, sorry with all respect to you, but that's really not an argument. I know people who learned a new language in 6 months without accent.

Shlama Akhi Distazo

I don't care who you know who learned a new language, whether they did it in 6 months or 6 days, with an accent or without. Being a native speaker is not only an argument, it is the strongest one possible. There is no other argument that comes remotely close in importance. If you have convinced yourself otherwise, then you are only deluding yourself. The reason your friend learned whatever language he learned is because a native speaker made it possible. And a student is not greater than his teacher. But anyway, I digress.

You asked me if there was a Semitic poem in revelation chapter 7.

I was surprised by your inquiry because you've been around long enough to know, that that question is akin to me asking you if there is a Semitic poem in the Book of Mormon. In your tradition, the Book of Mormon is not accepted as inspired scripture. Likewise, in my tradition the Book of Revelation is not accepted as inspired scripture. That is the reason for my comparison of the two. I could have substituted any of a number of books the Coptic tradition accepts as inspired scripture, which your tradition does not. The point is the same. If you get my point, great. If not, that's fine too. There's nothing more to the argument than that single point.

Despite my surprise at your inquiry, I bothered to answer your question with a resounding: No. There is no Semitic poem in Revelation chapter 7.

You then proceeded to quote a spurious, sophomoric and wholly uneducated article that Dave Bauscher wrote regarding the topic.

I then bothered to reply and tell you exactly why he is wrong. Yet, you continued to be combative and instead of simply accepting the reply, you continued with accusing me of being biased toward my tradition as well as arrogant due to my status of actually being a native speaker.

I'm afraid my years of experience with you on this forum is consistent with this attitude that you have.

Please refrain from asking me questions in the future, if you are already convinced that you or someone like Dave Bauscher already has the answer. I'm not interested in, nor have the time for this type of exercise in futility with you.

If you insist on being combative and argumentative, please come equipped with more than just your opinion and wit. The saying goes that a little bit of knowledge can be a very dangerous thing, and I'm afraid that is more applicable to you than just about anyone else I know. I'm not sure who exactly you are trying to impress, but it's certainly not me.

You rightly said that you don't have enough experience to recognize any poetry. Ironically, that is the very thing (experience) that a native speaker has. Something you feel is unimportant and "not an argument". Which begs the question: why did you bother to ask me?

Along that line of thought, I've many times suggested to you that if you dedicated half the time to bothering yourself with learning the language that you do being argumentative, you would not need to rely on me (or Dave Bauscher) to form your own conclusion.

If I sound upset at you, please know that I am not. If anything, I am more frustrated at myself for allowing you to do this more than I should have.

Future incidents like this one will result in your ban from this forum.
#23
Hi Paul,

Well, if this is your attitude, I request you to ban my account.

I have not the slightest idea of having be unrespectful to you, but if you think so, you should do what you have in mind.
My point is not just chapter 7 in Revelation being originally semitic and it has all signs of being Semitic in original just as arguments apply to e.g. the gospels in the Peshitta.

I don't need Bauscher or you to have my opinion on that. I was just asking if it did, as Bauscher said, you said no, and I accept that. I don't persist on invalid opinions.

But please remove my account.

Regards
#24
A break can be a good idea after producing more than 700 posts, but I want you to know, Distazo, that I appreciated your posts a lot when I read through half of the forum this autumn.

It should be hard to agree on what is poetry and what is not. Poetry is a message which has been encrypted by the character, ideology and experiences in a man's heart, with the effect that people with matching character and similar ideologies get the point, while others conclude it does not make sense. Christians have some of these in common but far from all.
#25
Hi Sestir,

I don't want to disturb peoples opinion, I think outside of the box, and if this is offensive to Paul, he really should do what he thinks is appropriate.

When there is a Christian atmosphere of freedom, we allow each others opinion. I was nowhere sarcastic, I was not disrespectful regarding tradition or even the CoE, nor against Paul.

If Paul really has had it with my attitude on this forum, he SHOULD ban my account. I am highly surprised by this sudden explosion, my attitude is always resepectful but I am NOT someone to be silenced just following the leaders opinion.

If a forum admin misuses his position, and thinks he needs threats of ban to silince people for ASKING nasty questions, he is not walking in the way of our Lord who ALWAYS accepted questions, EVEN from Tuma (Thomas) who doubted the resurrection.

Paul, if this is your viewpoint, I request to ban me, and remove my account.
#26
distazo Wrote:I was nowhere sarcastic, I was not disrespectful regarding tradition or even the CoE, nor against Paul.

Actually, you were. People can quite easily look at the previous posts in this thread and see the following comments:

Quote:Why do you use two standards? Tradition, ok, that's an argument I understand, but...
(you implied that I have a double standard when it comes to forming my opinion)
Quote:About poetry. Maybe when you saw 'Bauscher' did you stop reading?
(you implied that I ignored the content because of the author, who I actually have no problem with personally)
Quote:This version of Revelation is viewable in Dukhrana.com (it cannot quite be unfamiliar for you, right? <!-- sSmile --><img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/smile.gif" alt="Smile" title="Smile" /><!-- sSmile --> )
(you implied that I was ignoring the Aramaic translation on Dukhrana.com)

I can go on and on. I've spoken my wish, which is simply this: do not ask me any more questions that you think you already know the answer to. If you persist in pretending you are correct on a subject, no matter how off base your theory is, I'm not interested in wasting my time.

I didn't say that I wanted to ban your account now. I warned you that the next time you send me on a wild goose chase like this, utterly wasting my time and then being snippy about my intentions or insinuating that I have double standards, then your account would be banned. Not now - then.

This thread is locked.


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)