'hate' vs. 'set aside'
Christopher Lancaster aka "Raphael Lataster," _Was the New Testament Really Written in Greek? A Concise Compendium of the Many Internal and External Evidences of Aramaic Peshitta Primacy_ (2011), 328pp.
14. Do we need to hate to become good Christians? – Luke 14:26 / Romans 9:13 / 1John 3:15 / 1John 4:20-21
Luke 14:26
The KJV says: “If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.”
The NIV says: “"If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters--yes, even his own life--he cannot be my disciple.”
Well the problem here is that we are to “love our neighbour” and “honour our parents”.
More specifically, we are seemingly told to hate our “brothers”, while this is clearly condemned:
1John 3:15
KJV: “Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.”
NIV: “Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life in him.”
1John 4:20-21
KJV: “If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen? And this commandment have we from him, That he who loveth God love his brother also.”
NIV: “If anyone says, "I love God," yet hates his brother, he is a liar. For anyone who does not love his brother, whom he has seen, cannot love God, whom he has not seen. And he has given us this command: Whoever loves God must also love his brother.”
A similar problem occurs with Romans 9:13, where our loving God is portrayed in a different light, by the Greek.
Romans 9:13
KJV: “As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.”
NIV: “Just as it is written: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."”
Once again, the Peshitta comes to the rescue.
The Lamsa says (Luke 14:26): “He who comes to me and does not put aside his father and his mother and his brothers and his sisters and his wife and his children and even his own life cannot be a disciple to me.”
The Lamsa says (Romans 9:13): “As it is written, Jacob have I loved but Esau have I set aside.”
The answer lies in the Aramaic word "0ns" (sone'). It can mean “to put aside” and “to hate”. Clearly He is teaching that in order to be His disciple, we must be able to put aside those we love, and even be prepared to give our lives.
As this error is caused by a mistranslated word, it is an example of a semi-split word.
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
"I have my proper translations in greek"
The Greek translation of the original Aramaic of the New Testament has mistranslations.
My response to Ehrman is below. How would you respond to him?
_Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (And Why We Don't Know About Them)_ by Bart D. Ehrman (2009), 292pp. On 36, 37
https://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Interrupted...061173940/
Joseph is not Jesus' father. But that creates an obvious problem. If Jesus is not a blood-relation to Joseph, why is it that Matthew and Luke trace Jesus' bloodline precisely through Joseph? This is a question that neither author answers: both accounts give a genealogy that can't be the genealogy of Jesus, since his only bloodline goes through Mary, yet neither author provides her genealogy. .... Luke explicitly indicates that the family line is that of Joseph, not Mary (Luke 1:23; also Matthew 1:16). ....
There are other problems. In ... Matthew's genealogy .... from the Babylonian disaster to the birth of Jesus, fourteen generations (1:17). Fourteen, fourteen, and fourteen-it is almost as if God had planned it this way. .... The problem is that the fourteen-fourteen-fourteen schema doesn't actually work. If you read through the names carefully, you'll see that in the third set of fourteen there are in fact only thirteen generations.
////////////////////////////
Matthew 1:17 says there are 14, 14, 14 generations.
Greek manuscripts of Matthew's genealogy mistakenly list 14, 14, 13 generations.
In Aramaic mss. of Matthew's genealogy, with Mt 1:16's "gbra" correctly translated as father/guardian, Matthew's genealogy lists 14, 14, 14 generations.
Mary had a father/guardian named Joseph (plus a husband also called Joseph).
Jesus is a descendant of King David on his biological mother Mary's side (per Mt's genealogy), and on his step-dad Joseph's side (per Lk's genealogy).
=============================================.
"Jesus spoke and taught in Greek"
Evidence?
The movie "The Passion of the Christ" was done in Aramaic. Was Mel Gibson mistaken in concluding that Jesus spoke Aramaic?
"and lived in Greek-speaking Judea"
Of what language is Acts 1:19's Hakeldama? (Greek?)
Acts 1:19 (Amplified Bible), https://biblehub.com/acts/1-19.htm
All the people in Jerusalem learned about this, so in their own dialect—Aramaic—they called the piece of land Hakeldama, that is, Field of Blood.)
Do you agree with me that "Talitha kum" is a transliteration of Aramaic?
Mark 5:41 (Amplified Bible), https://biblehub.com/mark/5-41.htm
Taking the child’s hand, He said [tenderly] to her, “Talitha kum!”—which translated [from Aramaic] means, “Little girl, I say to you, get up!”
==========================================.
"Peshitta translation wasn't completed until 616 by Thomas of Harqel"
The Harklean is a stilted, clearly-translated translation from Greek, and is very different from the Aramaic Peshitta. Do you think Michaelis was mistaken in having high esteem for the Peshitta?
Johann David Michaelis, _Introduction to the New Testament, tr., and augmented with notes (and a Dissertation on the origin and composition of the three first gospels)_ as translated by Herbert Marsh, 4 vols., vol. 2 part 1 (1802), 40+
https://books.google.com/books?id=Y1gHAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA39
The Peshito is the very best translation of the Greek Testament that I have ever read; that of Luther, though in some respects inferior to his translation of the Old Testament, holding the second rank. Of all the Syriac authors, with which I am acquainted, not excepting Ephrem and BarHebræus, its language is the most elegant and pure, not loaded with foreign words, like the Philoxenian version, and other later writings, and discovers the hand of a master, in rendering those passages, where the two idioms deviate from each other. It has no marks of the stiffness of a translation, but is written with the ease and fluency of an original; and this excellence of style must be ascribed to its antiquity, and to its being written in a city that was the residence of Syrian kings. See Rom. ix. 20. xiii. 1. Heb. vii. 3. 8. Acts v. 37. xix. 39. xxii. 3. xxvii. 3. compared with the first section of the Curæ in Act. Apost. Syr. where I have pointed out the excellent manner in which the the Syriac translator has rendered the Greek phrases, and in the third and sixth section of the Curæ other examples are quoted.
....
Beside the critical use of the Syriac version, which will be examined in the following section, it leads us sometimes to just and beautiful explanations, where other help is insufficient, for instance Matth. vi. 7. John xvi. 2. Rom. ix. 22. xiii. 3. and confirms some ancient rites, in which we are deeply interested, such as the celebration of Sunday, 1 Cor. xi. 20. And in discovering either the meaning of an unusual word, or the unusual meaning of a common word, where no assistance can be had from the Greek authors, the Syriac version may be of singular service, as the translator was probably acquainted with the language of common life, as well as with the language of books, and is at least of equal authority with a Greek lexicon of later ages.
....
SECT. IX.
Critical use of the Syriac version.
THE chief advantage to be derived from the Syriac version is, in applying it to the purposes of criticism. Its high antiquity, and frequent deviation from the common reading, in passages of importance, must recommend the use of it to every critic, who in general will find himself rewarded for his trouble.
=======================================.
"source says, 'The dialect of Jerusalem was East-Aramæan, or, as we call it, Chaldee, and according to this dialect are written the Aramæan words that are found in the Greek Testament, for instance Acts i. 19. 1 Cor. xvi. 22. The Syriac New Testament is written in the same language, but in a different dialect. ' That's what I told you"
Do you agree with me that Greek mss. for Acts 1:19 and 1 Cor 16:22 contain transliterations of Aramaic words, specifically Akeldama and Maranatha?
Acts 1:19 (NIV)
Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.)
1 Corinthians 16:22 (Amplified Bible), https://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/16-22.htm
If anyone does not love the Lord [does not obey and respect and believe in Jesus Christ and His message], he is to be accursed. Maranatha (O our Lord, come)!
"the Peshitta was written centuries later by translating from the Greek"
Evidence from the Peshitta that it's a translation?
"And, in dialect different from the Aramaic words in the NT"
What Aramaic dialect is here?:
Mark 15:34 (Berean Literal)
https://biblehub.com/mark/15-34.htm
And at the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice, "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?" Which is translated, "My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?"
"different from the Aramaic of the time and place of Jesus"
Reference?
"attack the Bible"
Re: Jeremiah, my response to Bible critic and ex-Christian Ehrman is below. How would you respond to him?
_Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (And Why We Don't Know About Them)_ by Bart D. Ehrman (2009), 292pp., 51
https://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Interrupted...061173940/
3. _Why does Matthew quote the wrong prophet?_ When Matthew indicates that Judas betrayed Jesus for thirty pieces of silver, he notes (as by now we expect of him) that this was in fulfillment of Scripture: "Then was fulfilled what had been spoken through the prophet Jeremiah, And they took the thirty pieces of silver ... and they gave them for the potter's field" (Mathew 27:9-10). The problem is that this prophecy is not found in Jeremiah. It appears to be a loose quotation of Zechariah 11:3.
////////////////////////////
For Mt 27:9-10, Greek manuscripts have the erroneous addition that Jeremiah said a particular remark, when there's no Old Testament evidence that Jeremiah said that. The Aramaic original leaves unspecified the name of the prophet, avoiding an unnecessary contradiction:
(based on Younan)
"Then the thing was fulfilled which was spoken of by the prophet who said,
"I took the thirty (pieces) of silver,
the price of the precious one
which (those) from the sons of Israel agreed upon."
=============================================.
"Aramaic was known as the language of the Jews"
Was it the language of anyone else?
Daniel 2:4 (English Standard Version), https://biblehub.com/daniel/2-4.htm
Then the Chaldeans said to the king in Aramaic, "O king, live forever! Tell your servants the dream, and we will show the interpretation."
"That doesn't mean that it was the language was common among the Jews. It means the language was particular to the Jews"
Do you think the individuals named Rehum and Shimshai were Jews?
Ezra 4:7-8, https://biblehub.com/ezra/4-8.htm
7 And in the days of Artaxerxes king of Persia, Bishlam, Mithredath, Tabeel, and the rest of his associates wrote a letter to Artaxerxes. It was written in Aramaic and then translated.
8 Rehum the commander and Shimshai the scribe wrote the letter against Jerusalem to King Artaxerxes as follows:
From
https://biblehub.com/commentaries/ezra/4-8.htm
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
Ezr 4:7-24. Letter to Artaxerxes.
7. in the days of Artaxerxes wrote Bishlam, &c.—The three officers named are supposed to have been deputy governors appointed by the king of Persia over all the provinces subject to his empire west of the Euphrates.
the Syrian tongue—or Aramæan language, called sometimes in our version, Chaldee. This was made use of by the Persians in their decrees and communications relative to the Jews (compare 2Ki 18:26; Isa 36:11). The object of their letter was to press upon the royal notice the inexpediency and danger of rebuilding the walls of Jerusalem. They labored hard to prejudice the king's mind against that measure.
....
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
8. At this verse begins the first long section (Ezra 4:8 to Ezra 6:18) written in the Aramaic language (see Introd.), which the Compiler has probably extracted bodily from Aramaic records.
Ezra 4:8 introduces briefly the description of the letter of accusation against the Jews sent by Rehum and Shimshai.
=====================================.
"Jesus' words in the New Testament are Greek in origin and bear no marks of being a translation from Aramaic"
So "Talitha cum," "Ephphatha," "Abba," "Raca," and "Eli Eli lema sabachthani" is Greek?
What Verses in the New Testament Are Aramaic? - Aug 2, 2019
https://bustedhalo.com/ministry-resource...re-aramaic
Talitha cum meaning “Little girl, get up!” (Mark 5:41)
Ephphatha meaning “Be opened.” (Mark 7:34)
Abba meaning “Father” (Mark 14:36)
Raca meaning “fool” (Matthew 5:22)
Rabbouni meaning “teacher” (John 20:16)
Eli Eli lema sabachthani meaning “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46)
Hosanna meaning “O Lord, save us.” (Mark 11:9)
Maranatha meaning “Lord, come!” (1 Corinthians 16:22)
Mark 7:34 (Amplified Bible), https://biblehub.com/mark/7-34.htm
and looking up to heaven, He sighed deeply and said to the man, “Ephphatha,” which [in Aramaic] means, “Be opened and released!”
Mark 15:34 (The Passion Translation)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se...ersion=TPT
34 About three o’clock, Jesus shouted with a mighty voice in Aramaic,[a] “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?”—that is, “My God, My God, why have you turned your back on me?”[b]
a: The last words of Jesus were spoken in Aramaic. Every Greek text gives a transliteration of the Aramaic words and then translates them back into Greek.
b: See Pss. 22:1; 42:9. The Aramaic can be translated “For this purpose you have spared me.” [df: better: "My God, My God, why have you spared me?" as in, 'can't we just get this over with?']
Matthew 5:22 (The Passion Translation)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se...ersion=TPT
But I’m telling you, if you hold anger in your heart toward a fellow believer, you are subject to judgment. And whoever demeans and insults[c] a fellow believer is answerable to the congregation. And whoever calls down curses upon a fellow believer is in danger of being sent to a fiery hell.
c: The Aramaic is raca and can mean “spittle” or “lunatic.” It is a word that could imply calling a fellow believer demon-possessed. The Greek is “worthless fool, imbecile.”
=================================================.
"Every time someone in the New Testament someone spoke Aramaic, the Jews didn't understand what was being said"
2 examples?
"Several times there's references to Aramaic, as if it's notable. But, no references to anyone deviating to Greek. Just like when you're reading common English articles, there's no mention English being used"
'Bar' appears several times in names in the NT, e.g. Barabbas (Son of the Father), Barnabas (Son of Encouragement), Bar-Jesus, Bar-Jonah (Son of a Dove), Barsabas, Bartholomew, and Bar-Timaeus. Is 'Bar' Greek?
"Do you think Pontius Pilate new Aramaic?"
I doubt it. I imagine he had a translator.
"The Jews never had any issues conversing with Romans"
2 instances?
"The Jews never had any issues conversing with... any of the numerous Jews from far off who spoke other languages (see Acts 2)"
Do you think the people that make pilgrimages to Mecca have any difficulties understanding the languages of their fellow pilgrims?
"there's no indication that Jews ever switched to Greek to communicate with anyone"
Not even Paul?
Acts 21:37
https://biblehub.com/acts/21-37.htm
(NIV) As the soldiers were about to take Paul into the barracks, he asked the commander, "May I say something to you?" "Do you speak Greek?" he replied.
(New Living) As Paul was about to be taken inside, he said to the commander, “May I have a word with you?” “Do you know Greek?” the commander asked, surprised.
===========================================.
Matthew 27 (Berean Study Bible)
https://biblehub.com/bsb/matthew/27.htm
9 Then what was spoken through Jeremiah the prophet was fulfilled:
“They took the thirty pieces of silver,
the price set on Him by the people of Israel,
10 and they gave them for the potter’s field,
as the Lord had commanded me.”
"Matthew 27 references Jeremiah 32"
In these verses?:
Jeremiah 32 (Berean Study Bible)
https://biblehub.com/bsb/jeremiah/32.htm#6
6 Jeremiah replied, “The word of the LORD came to me, saying:
7 Behold! Hanamel, the son of your uncle Shallum, is coming to you to say, ‘Buy for yourself my field in Anathoth, for you have the right of redemption to buy it.’
8 Then, as the LORD had said, my cousin Hanamel came to me in the courtyard of the guard and urged me, ‘Please buy my field in Anathoth in the land of Benjamin, for you own the right of inheritance and redemption. Buy it for yourself.’ ”
Then I knew that this was the word of the LORD.
9 So I bought the field in Anathoth from my cousin Hanamel, and I weighed out seventeen shekels of silver.
========================================.
"If our New Testament were a translation, then 'bar' would have been translated"
Translated from what language?
"The Jews spoke Greek, but used some loan words"
Is 'bar' as in 'son of' a loan word? If 'yes,' from what language?
"The Bible provides no hint of a translator"
Is there anywhere in the Bible where use of a translator is mentioned?
"Most Muslims who go to Mecca are fluent in Arabic"
Reference?
Including those Muslims from Indonesia, Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh?
Are all the Muslims who go to Mecca able to understand each other?
Which Countries Have the Highest Number of Hajj Pilgrims in 2017? - Aug 27, 2017
https://ilmfeed.com/countries-highest-nu...rims-2017/
Millions apply from Muslim-majority countries but due to a quota system, not everyone is able to come – the Saudi authorities usually allocate 1,000 places for each million Muslim per country.
The following graphic shows the top 10 countries who have the highest numbers of Hajj pilgrims in 2017:
1. Indonesia – 221,000
2. Pakistan – 179,210
3. India – 170,000
4. Bangladesh – 127,198
5. Egypt – 108,000
6. Iran – 86,500
7. Nigeria – 79,000
8. Turkey – 79,000
9. Algeria – 36,000
10. Morocco – 31,000
Source: Al Jazeera
"Unlike Christians who aren't even expected to read the Bible in English, Muslims expect their fellow Muslims to learn Arabic to read the Koran in Arabic. So, many of the Muslims in Indonesia do speak Arabic"
What percent of "Muslims in Indonesia do speak Arabic"? (10%?)
Is this correct?: "The bits of Quran and basic religious greetings and phrases (al-salaamu alaykoom) would be all the Arabic most non-Arab Muslims would know"
Arabic letters are phonetic, making it easy to sound out written Arabic words. But that's a very different matter than understanding spoken Arabic. Rote memorization of portions of the Quran is done worldwide by non-Arabic Muslims, but just because they memorize it, and just because they can pronounce the written words, that doesn't mean they understand it. Numerous non-Arabic Muslims 'read' the Quran without having the foggiest idea of what they're 'reading.'
Do Muslims understand Arabic?
https://www.quora.com
Most don’t, because most Muslims speak other languages. The countries with the largest Muslim populations and their languages are, according to Wikipedia: Indonesia (205m, mostly Indonesian), Pakistan (178m, Urdu and Sindi), India (172m, many), Bangladesh (146m, Bengali) and Nigeria (94m, many). An Arabic-speaking country doesn’t break into the table until a tie for sixth (Egypt, Iran and Turkey are all about 75m). I’m guessing that native Arabic speakers form only about 20% of Muslims worldwide.
Most Muslims memorize at least a couple of chapters (suras) of the Quran in Arabic, but that isn’t the same as understanding the language. The bits of Quran and basic religious greetings and phrases (al-salaamu alaykoom) would be all the Arabic most non-Arab Muslims would know, other than those who worked in an Arab country or studied the Quran and other religious literature seriously.
"They all spoke Greek, in addition to the visitors peaking their local languages"
Was a miracle involved in those gathered into Jerusalem from around the world understanding Peter?
Do you think everybody that heard Peter's speech in Acts 2 spoke both Greek and another language, i.e. the language of their region of origin?
Do you think Peter's speech was in Greek?
=============================================.
"You believe the Greek NT was translated from Aramaic"
Do you think the parents who named their children these names had Greek as their native language?:
Barabbas (Son of the Father), Barnabas (Son of Encouragement), Bar-Jesus, Bar-Jonah (Son of a Dove), Barsabas, Bartholomew, and Bar-Timaeus.
"There are a number of examples where we're told someone couldn't understand someone else"
OK.
"Peter's speech was in Greek"
Do you think that when Peter made his speech, he spoke of God freeing/loosing Jesus from "the _agony/pains_ of death"?
Acts 2:24
https://biblehub.com/acts/2-24.htm
(NIV) But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death,
because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him.
(NKJV) whom God raised up, having loosed the pains of death,
because it was not possible that He should be held by it.
mistranslation for Acts 2:24
https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Aramaic_origi...ent_theory
When translated well it reads: "But Allaha [God] loosed the cords of Sheol [the Grave/Death] and raised him [Yeshua/Jesus] because it was not possible that he be held in it, in Sheol." The Greek versions mistranslated the word "cords" as 'pain.' (cf. Jn 2:15 & 2 Samuel 22:6) —Paul Younan
"Peter's speech was in Greek"
Do you think that when Peter made his speech, he commented:
"The Lord said to my Lord"?
"Master YHWH said to my Lord"?
Acts 2:34 (NIV), https://biblehub.com/acts/2-34.htm
For David did not ascend to heaven, and yet he said,
"'The Lord said to my Lord: "Sit at my right hand
Acts 2:34, https://biblehub.com/interlinear/acts/2-34.htm
.... Said the
2962 Kyrios Κύριος Lord
to
2962 Kyriō Κυρίῳ [the] Lord
of me Sit at [the] right hand of Me
Acts 2:34 (Peshitta Holy Bible)
https://biblehub.com/aramaic-plain-english/acts/2.htm
"For David had not ascended to Heaven, because he said,
"THE LORD JEHOVAH said to my Lord, 'Sit at my right hand',
Acts 2:34 (based on Younan), http://dukhrana.com
34-35. For it was not (that) Dawid did ascend into Heaven, because he said,
MrYa said to Mari [Master YHWH said to my Lord],
Sit yourself at my right hand,
until I place your enemies (as) a footstool for your feet'.'
=====================================.
"To the Greek-speaking Jews of Jerusalem, these were just ancestral names honoring their religious heritage.... people who gave their kids Hebraic-derived names spoke Greek"
Do you think the angel that spoke to Joseph re: the naming of Jesus spoke Greek to Joseph?
'Yeshua' means 'Salvation' in Aramaic and Hebrew. What does 'Ἰησοῦν' mean?
Matthew 1:21 (NIV)
https://biblehub.com/matthew/1-21.htm
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/matthew/1-21.htm
She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus [Greek:
Iēsoun/ Ἰησοῦν], because he will save his people from their sins."
========================================================.
"It's nonsense to say that Jesus only has meaning in"
What does Ἰησοῦν mean? ('Salvation'?)
What connection is there between Ἰησοῦν and "because he will save his people from their sins"?
Matthew 1:21 (NIV)
https://biblehub.com/matthew/1-21.htm
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/matthew/1-21.htm
She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus [Greek:
Iēsoun/ Ἰησοῦν], because he will save his people from their sins."
"the angel who spoke to Joseph spoke Greek"
Do you think _Antiquity of the Jews_ by Josephus was initially written in Greek?
Flavius Josephus, _The Wars of the Jews_
perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0148
....and while their writings contain sometimes accusations, and sometimes encomiums, but no where the accurate truth of the facts; I have proposed to myself, for the sake of such as live under the government of the Romans, to translate those books into the Greek tongue, which I formerly composed in the language of our country, and sent to the Upper Barbarians; 3 Joseph, the son of Matthias, by birth a Hebrew, a priest also, and one who at first fought against the Romans myself, and was forced to be present at what was done afterwards, [am the author of this work].
Flavius Josephus, _Against Apion_
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text...99.01.0216
1 I SUPPOSE that by my books of the Antiquity of the Jews, most excellent Epaphroditus, 2 have made it evident to those who peruse them, that our Jewish nation is of very great antiquity, and had a distinct subsistence of its own originally; as also, I have therein declared how we came to inhabit this country wherein we now live. Those Antiquities contain the history of five thousand years, and are taken out of our sacred books, but are translated by me into the Greek tongue.
Josephus, _Antiquities of the Jews_, XX, XI
I have also taken a great deal of pains to obtain the learning of the Greeks, and understand the elements of the Greek language … [yet] I cannot pronounce Greek with sufficient exactness; for our nation does NOT encourage those that learn the languages of many nations … because they [the Jews] look upon this sort of accomplishment as common [very lowly] … But they give him the testimony of being a wise man who is fully acquainted with our [Jewish] laws … [in contrast] as there have been many who have done their endeavors with great patience to obtain this [Greek] learning, there have yet hardly been so many as two or three that have succeeded therein, who were immediately well rewarded for their pains -- emphases added as cited in
25 Irrefutable Reasons Why the New Testament Was NOT Originally Written in Greek
https://www.biblicaltruths.com/25-irrefu...-in-greek/
============================================.
"errors"
Translation from the original Aramaic to Greek to English yields this rather strange remark:
Romans 5:7 NIV
Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous person,
though for a good person someone might possibly dare to die.
Translating directly from the original Aramaic yields a much more sensible remark:
Murdock; Lamsa
http://www.dukhrana.com/peshitta/index.php
- (for rarely doth one die for the ungodly;
though for the good, some one perhaps might venture to die. . . .
- Hardly would any man die for the sake of the wicked:
but for the sake of the good, one might be willing to die.
"When Josephus said he had trouble speaking Greek with exactness, he only meant without a Judean accent. Given that we know for a fact he wrote a lot in Greek, we know he was fluent in Greek"
Were Josephus's initial drafts in Greek?
Do you think _Antiquity of the Jews_ by Josephus was initially written in Greek?
Flavius Josephus, _The Wars of the Jews_
perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0148
....and while their writings contain sometimes accusations, and sometimes encomiums, but no where the accurate truth of the facts; I have proposed to myself, for the sake of such as live under the government of the Romans, to translate those books into the Greek tongue, which I formerly composed in the language of our country, and sent to the Upper Barbarians; 3 Joseph, the son of Matthias, by birth a Hebrew, a priest also, and one who at first fought against the Romans myself, and was forced to be present at what was done afterwards, [am the author of this work].
Flavius Josephus, _Against Apion_
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text...99.01.0216
1 I SUPPOSE that by my books of the Antiquity of the Jews, most excellent Epaphroditus, 2 have made it evident to those who peruse them, that our Jewish nation is of very great antiquity, and had a distinct subsistence of its own originally; as also, I have therein declared how we came to inhabit this country wherein we now live. Those Antiquities contain the history of five thousand years, and are taken out of our sacred books, but are translated by me into the Greek tongue.
"explain to me why there's not one remnant of Aramaic scripter from the first or second century?"
The Aramaic Dead Sea Scrolls - 11 Sept 2018
biblicalarchaeology.org
Since Hebrew was the language of Israelite tradition, scripture, and culture, some may be surprised to hear that many of the Dead Sea Scrolls are in Aramaic, the common language of Jesus’s time. .... The tally of the Qumran Aramaic texts includes more than 30 literary works, which represent about 12 percent of the Dead Sea Scrolls.
_Targum and Translation: A Reconsideration of the Qumran Aramaic Version of Job_
amazon.com
https://www.amazon.com/Targum-Translatio...023240170/
"explain why the Peshitta is written in a dialect that didn't exist in the time and place of Jesus"
What dialect is that? What dialects are in the Aramaic Mark 15:34?
b) Mark 15:34 (Younan)
And in the ninth hour, Yeshua cried out in a loud voice and said,
"'Ail! Ail! Lamna shwaqthani?'",
that is,
"'Allahi! Allahi! Lamna shwaqthani?'"
Note how both the first phrase and the recasting of it have "Lamna shwaqthani."
Also, "Allahi" is Aramaic for 'my Allaha,' while 'Ail' strikes me as being 'El'-- short for 'Elohim' i.e. a Hebrew term for 'God.' In the OT, both Daniel and Michael have 'El'-- short for 'Elohim'-- as part of their names.
B) Mark 15:34 (HCSB), biblegateway.com
And at three Jesus cried out with a loud voice,
"Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?"
which is translated,
"My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?"
transliteration of the Greek transliteration of the original Aramaic: eloi eloi lema sabachthani
transliteration of the Greek translation: ho ego theos ho ego theos eis tis enkataleipo ego
Notice the stark dissimilarity of the transliteration and translation.
"produced centuries later by known translators?"
What translators produced the Peshitta?
"Why didn't the first century Christians preserve any of Jesus' words in their original language, if it were Aramaic"
There's Jesus' words in Aramaic in the NT:
What Verses in the New Testament Are Aramaic? - Aug 2, 2019
https://bustedhalo.com/ministry-resource...re-aramaic
Talitha cum meaning “Little girl, get up!” (Mark 5:41)
Ephphatha meaning “Be opened.” (Mark 7:34)
Abba meaning “Father” (Mark 14:36)
Raca meaning “fool” (Matthew 5:22)
Rabbouni meaning “teacher” (John 20:16)
Eli Eli lema sabachthani meaning “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46)
Hosanna meaning “O Lord, save us.” (Mark 11:9)
Maranatha meaning “Lord, come!” (1 Corinthians 16:22)
"how come in the New Testament, there's not one example of anyone speaking Aramaic to a group of Jews and the Jews showing understanding?"
There's Jesus' words in Aramaic in the NT-- see above.
"there are examples of people speaking Aramaic and the Jews not understanding"
References?
===============================================.
"the Peshitta wasn't written until centuries the Greek New Testament was written"
Evidence?
"you don't accidentally translate nothing into the word Greek"
Do you think calling the woman who spoke of table crumbs 'Greek' was purposeful?
"it is unfortunate that sometimes translators drop text to remove a perceived contradiction. So, the Peshitta leaving out this detail suggests the Peshitta is the translation"
So you think the woman really was Greek?
The Peshitta says she was a pagan/heathen. Do you think she was a pagan?
"The New Testament often contrasts Jews vs. Greeks, even when the Greek nationality isn't properly meant"
When the NT refers to 'Greeks,' to what does it refer?
=========================================.
"Tatian wrote an Aramaic.... That was the late second century"
I see.
"he didn't write from an Aramaic source"
The footnotes in Hogg's translation of the 'Arabic Diatesseron' included in the Ante-Nicene Fathers series, make cclear that it was translated from Syriac/Aramaic into Arabic. Have you examined the footnotes therein?
https://netzarimemunah.org/2019/05/25/the-diatessaron/
[9] The Arabic word ordinarily means tribe or nation, but in this work it regularly represents the Syriac word used in the N.T. for ‘generation.’ ....
[14] Here and elsewhere the Arabic translator uses life, live, and give life, as in Syriac, for salvation, etc. ....
[88] So in the Arabic. It is, however, simply a misinterpretation of the expression in the Syriac versions, for at the place of toll (cf. Ibn-at-Tayyib’s Commentary). ....
[90] Lit. son-of-the-roofs, a Syriac expression (cf. § 24, 31, note). ....
[258] Lit. fattens, as in Peshitta. ....
[291] Represents a mistaken vocalisation of the Peshitta. ....
[421] Lit. The son-of-the-roof, a Syriac phrase meaning a demon of lunacy.
[422] A word used in Arabic of the devil producing insanity; but here it reproduces the Peshitta....
Concluding note in the Borgian mss. of the 'Arabic Diatesseron,' in
J. Hamlyn Hill, _The earliest life of Christ ever compiled from the four Gospels, being the Diatessaron of Tatian (circ. A.D. 160) Literally translated from the Arabic version and containing the four Gospels woven into one story_
https://archive.org/stream/earliestlifeo...h_djvu.txt
The Gospel is concluded, which Tatian compiled out of the four
Gospels of the four holy apostles the blessed evangelists, on
whom be peace, and which he named _Diatessaron_, that is, That
which is composed of four. The excellent and learned presbyter,
Abu-l-Faraj Abdullah Ibn-at-Tayyib, with whom may God be
pleased, translated it from Syriac into Arabic, from a copy
written by the hand of Gubasi ibn Ali Al-mutayyib, a disciple
of Hunain ibn Ishak, on both of whom may God have mercy.
Amen.
Do you think Tatian translated the 4 Greek gospels into Aramaic, and then from that translation into Aramaic compiled his Diatesseron?
Bruce Metzger, _The Early Versions of the New Testament: Their Origin, Transmission, and
Limitations_, 11-12
PDF: http://www.baytagoodah.com/uploads/9/5/6...tament.pdf
It is evident that Tatian went about composing his Diatessaron
with great diligence. Probably he worked from four separate
manuscripts, one for each of the Gospels, and, as he wove together
phrases, now from this Gospel and now that, he would no doubt
cross out those phrases in the manuscripts from which he was
copying. Otherwise it is difficult to understand how he was able
to combine so successfully phrases from four documents into a
remarkable cento which reminds one of delicate filigree work.
"if the Greek says Jesus is in danger of Hell, so does the Peshitta"
Actually, the Peshitta doesn't: 2 different words are used in Peshitta Matthew 5:22 & 23:17. In contrast, the Greek translation uses the same Greek word, Strong's #3474.
===================================================.
According to Gorgias Press's single volume Peshitta NT (2020), 661pp., pg 63
https://www.gorgiaspress.com/new-testame...h-overview
the verb in Peshitta Matthew 21:14 can be understood either as
'they brought to him the blind and the lame'
or as
'the blind and the lame came to him.'
The Greek translator of the Aramaic understood it as the latter.
Which do you think is the better understanding?
Matthew 21:14
https://biblehub.com/matthew/21-14.htm
(NIV)
The blind and the lame came to him at the temple,
and he healed them.
(King James)
And the blind and the lame came to him in the temple;
and he healed them.
(Aramaic Bible in Plain English)
And they brought to him in The Temple the blind and the lame,
and he healed them.
"the Peshitta was produced in a dialect that didn't exist Jesus' time"
Evidence?
"produced centuries after the Greek Gospels were written"
Evidence? Produced by who? And exactly when?
"if the Greek Matthew says Jesus is in danger of Hell fire"
That's what the Greek Matthew says.
"Jesus is not in danger of Hell fire"
According to the Greek Matthew, he is.
==========================================.
"I don't think Tatian translated the four Gospels into Aramaic and then compiled them them in his Diatesseron. I think he produced a compilation because it was easier than a direct translation of each of the Gospels"
Do you think Tatian worked with Greek gospels to synthesize his Diatesseron, and he then translated his Diatesseron into Aramaic?
"if distinct Aramaic Gospel translations existed, the Syriac Christian community would have been using them instead of the Diatesseron, and they weren't"
The Eastern Syriac Christian community had and was & is the preserver of the 4 'separated gospels,' plus the rest of the NT writings they were the custodians of, i.e. the NT except for the 'Western Five' (2 Peter, 2 Jn, 3 Jn, Jude, and Revelation).
"Wikipadia says 'Tatian's most influential work is the Diatessaron, a Biblical paraphrase, or 'harmony', of the four gospels that became the standard text of the four gospels in the Syriac-speaking churches until the 5th-century, after which it gave way to the four separate gospels in the Peshitta version.'"
Did the Syriac-speaking churches have Acts, Romans, the Pauline epistles, Hebrews, etc. prior to the 5th-century?
"why would Syriac speaking churches use a paraphrase with the four gospels combined into one book, if they had four separate gospels"
When out and about, I have a NT + Psalms and Proverbs. I don't carry a complete Bible. That I carry a NT + Ps + Prov doesn't mean I lack a complete Bible.
If a church reads every Sunday a chapter of the Diatesseron, that doesn't mean that that church lacks the entire NT.
Going thru the Diatesseron throughout the year is a convenient way to go thru the life of Christ in a year.
Books were expensive and hard to produce. It's easier to write out copies of the Diatesseron by hand than it is to write out copies of the 4 Gospels by hand.
It's easier to write out copies of the Diatesseron by hand than it is to write out copies of the entire NT by hand.
The Diatesseron was wildly popular in Syria, and there were far more copies of it in Syria than there were copies of the entire NT in Syria.
==============================================.
"where, before the 5th century were those four Gospels that you think were written in the Syriac language, in the first century, by Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John?"
Before Acts, Romans, the Pauline epistles, Hebrews, and the other NT books the Church of the East carefully copied and recopied through the years.
"why did Syriac Christians eventually start using the four Gospels"
From the outset, Syriac Christians had the 4 gospels direct from the authors' pens.
"Why didn't the rich or scholarly Christians spring for the expensive copies of each of the four Gospels sooner?"
I imagine some did.
How would you respond to this?:
J. de Zwaan, "John Wrote in Aramaic" _Journal of Biblical Literature_ (1938), 155-171, 161
https://www.jstor.org/stable/3259746
John 13^13 Ὑμεῖς φωνεῖτέ με Ὁ διδάσκαλος καί Ὁ κύριος is bad Greek, just about as astonishing as if one should say in English: "you cry me teacher and lord." The right word, which John knew quite well, would have been καλεῖτε. Why did he ever write φωνεῖν?
=====================================================.
Do you agree there's an Aramaism in "ἐγώ εἰμι-- ἡ ἄμπελος"?
Do you agree that "the constant use of the personal pronoun through the book" of John "is due in large part to the Aramaic participial construction which generally required a pronoun"?
John 15:5, https://biblehub.com/interlinear/john/15-5.htm
Egō Ἐγώ I
eimi εἰμι am
hē ἡ the
ampelos ἄμπελος vine
James A. Montgomery, _The Origin of the Gospel According to St. John_ (1923), 30pp., 18-19
https://archive.org/stream/originofgospe...t_djvu.txt
Another frequent idiom is that of the nominal predicate,
e. g., such a sentence as “I am the Vine”. In the many cases of
this self-assertion of Jesus the wording always is,
ἐγώ εἰμι-- ἡ ἄμπελος, etc. The use of both pronoun and the predicate
verb is hardly Greek, which would generally find one or the other term
sufficient. But the usage represents a Semitism, particularly
an Aramaism, namely in this case _ena hu gefitta_, which the Greek
spells out laboriously by three words, rendering the _hu_ “it”
(literally, “I am it, the vine”, cf. the similar French idiom), by
the predicate verb.
This consideration also explains the dominant use of “I”
(ἐγώ) in the Gospel-- which I had been wont to ascribe
to the divine consciousness of Jesus, or that consciousness
as alleged by the author. But this explanation is not necessary.
John Baptist says equally: “Not _am I_ the Christ”.
It is also to be noted that the constant use of the personal pronoun
through the book is due in large part to the Aramaic participial
construction which generally required a pronoun. To take an example
at hazard: the Baptist says, 3, 28, “Ye witness that I said (εἶπον
ἐγὼ), Not am I the Christ.” WH brackets the first ἐγώ on textual
grounds, but I would judge philologically that the apparently
superfluous pronoun represents the original Aramaic thought.
John 3:28
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/john/3-28.htm
https://biblehub.com/greek/3754.htm
eipon εἶπον I said
hoti [ὅτι] that
Ouk Οὐκ Not
eimi εἰμὶ am
egō ἐγὼ I
ho ὁ the
Christos Χριστός Christ
=======================
"From John 21:16 we know the Greek is the original because the Syriac lacks the vocabulary for an accurate and direct translation"
What do you think of this reasoning?:
'From John 21:16 we know the German is the original because the Syriac lacks the vocabulary for an accurate and direct translation.'
"If the Greek were the translation, it would be an accurate an direct translation of the wording of the Syriac"
The Greek translator of the original Aramaic knew the meaning of "amri [my lambs/ young sheep]" and "airbi [my rams/ adult male sheep]," but didn't know the meaning of "nequthi [my ewes/ adult female sheep]," so he rendered the Aramaic as "arnion [lambs].... probaton [adult sheep/ goats].... probaton."
"if the Syriac was the original, how does the same word, in the same context, in the same verse get transformed into two different words in the Greek translation?"
Which word are you referring to?
"you'd have to think almost every verse of the Greek New Testament is riddled with dumb mistakes"
The Greek translation of the Aramaic is a decent translation. Like almost all translations, it could use improvement.
"In reality, it's the Syriac that is off, and not because of dumb mistakes, but because of the limitations of the Syriac language"
What limitations do you refer to? Syriac has been used to compose elaborate poems that make sense when read, _and when read backward_.
===============================================.
"From John 21:16 we know the Greek is the original because the Syriac lacks the vocabulary for an accurate and direct translation"
Some people claim that the NT was originally in Hebrew. What do you think of this reasoning?:
'From John 21:16 we know the Hebrew is the original because the Syriac lacks the vocabulary for an accurate and direct translation.'
Also, what vocabulary is lacking in Syriac?
James A. Montgomery, _The Origin of the Gospel According to St. John_ (1923), 30pp., 30
https://archive.org/stream/originofgospe...t_djvu.txt
CONCLUSION
The end of my argument is this: That the Gospel of St. John
is the composition of a well-informed Jew, not of the Pharisaic
party, whose life experience was gained in Palestine in the first
half of the first century, and whose mother-tongue was Aramaic;
and that this conclusion alone explains the excellence of the
historical data and the philological phenomena of the book--
unless, indeed, with Burney, we must argue to a translation from
an Aramaic original.
"if the Syriac was the original, how does the same word, in the same context, in the same verse get transformed into two different words in the Greek translation?"
Sometimes the translator into Greek was confronted with an Aramaic word that had 2 meanings, both of which could plausibly have been intended. At that point, sometimes the translator into Greek made mention of both meanings in his translation. Other times, he selected an inferior meaning in preparing his translation-- he mistranslated.
=============================================.
Aramaic speakers to whom Revelation and Paul's epistles were written were widespread at the time, including in Greek cities.
"no one in Jesus' time/place spoke Syriac"
Not even Jesus? Not even the person who inscribed a 1st century A.D. burial box using Aramaic?
What Language Did Jesus Speak? - Mar 23, 2021; Mar 30, 2020
https://www.history.com/news/jesus-spoke-language
A first century A.D. burial box with an Aramaic inscription that reads "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus." Archeologists say this box possibly held the remains of James, the brother Jesus of Nazareth, dating back to 63 A.D.
...
"He spoke Aramaic, but he knew Hebrew," Netanyahu replied quickly.
Most religious scholars and historians agree with Pope Francis that the historical Jesus principally spoke a Galilean dialect of Aramaic. Through trade, invasions and conquest, the Aramaic language had spread far afield by the 7th century B.C., and would become the lingua franca in much of the Middle East.
In the first century A.D., it would have been the most commonly used language among ordinary Jewish people, as opposed to the religious elite, and the most likely to have been used among Jesus and his disciples in their daily lives.
===============================================
"Syriac is not the Aramaic of the first century"
What's the difference?
"the Greek Christians to whom Revelation were written didn't speak Aramaic or Syriac. They spoke Greek"
Evidence?
Do you agree with me that 'amen' and 'hallelujah' are used in Aramaic?
search for 'Hallelujah' at
https://biblescan.com/search.php?q=Hallelujah
Revelation 19:3 ... And again they shouted: "Hallelujah! The smoke from her goes up for ever and ever." And again their voices rang out: "Praise the LORD! ....
Revelation 19:6 ....like the roar of rushing waters and like loud peals of thunder, shouting: "Hallelujah! For our Lord God Almighty reigns. ....
Revelation 19:4 ....worshiped God, who was seated on the throne. And they cried: "Amen, Hallelujah!" ....
Revelation 19:1 ....I heard what sounded like the roar of a great multitude in heaven shouting: "Hallelujah! Salvation and glory and power belong to our God....
"you think a burial box proves what language Jesus spoke"
I don't think that.
"the Bible proves nothing about what language Jesus spoke"
Do you agree with me that "Talitha kum" is a transliteration of Aramaic?
Mark 5:41 (Amplified Bible), https://biblehub.com/mark/5-41.htm
Taking the child’s hand, He said [tenderly] to her, “Talitha kum!”—which translated [from Aramaic] means, “Little girl, I say to you, get up!”
"1) Aramaic made a revival as the Jews grew more intolerant of Roman occupation, after Jesus time, heading toward the rebellion of 70 AD, started in 67"
Reference for "Aramaic made a revival"?
"2) In formal and solemn cases, such as a burial box, people are less likely to use their common tongue and more like to use what they consider their native tongue"
What's the difference between "common tongue" and "native tongue"?
As which would you classify "Eli Eli lema sabachthani," which is Aramaic?
What Verses in the New Testament Are Aramaic? - Aug 2, 2019
https://bustedhalo.com/ministry-resource...re-aramaic
Talitha cum meaning “Little girl, get up!” (Mark 5:41)
Ephphatha meaning “Be opened.” (Mark 7:34)
Abba meaning “Father” (Mark 14:36)
Raca meaning “fool” (Matthew 5:22)
Rabbouni meaning “teacher” (John 20:16)
Eli Eli lema sabachthani meaning “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46)
Hosanna meaning “O Lord, save us.” (Mark 11:9)
Maranatha meaning “Lord, come!” (1 Corinthians 16:22)
======================================================.
"if Rev 10:1 were translated from Aramaic, and if Aramaic uses the same word for either feet or legs, then Rev 10:1 would say, in Greek, 'legs like pillars of fire', not feet"
Do you agree with the Greek that there were 'feet like pillars of fire'?
"we have two choice, your argument that our Greek mss of Revelation are a result of an incompetent Greek translator. Or, Revelation was originally written in Greek and the author really meant feet"
The translator from Aramaic to Greek was largely competent. The book pronounces dire penalties for those who tamper with the text, and the translator tried mightily to do an accurate translation, even if that meant including grammatical monstrosities that conveyed information about the underlying Aramaic.
How do you account for the Greek Revelation's grammatical monstrosities?
Argument from bad Greek grammar in Revelation to it not being originally Greek
https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Aramaic_origi...ent_theory
Torrey opines that Revelation was originally in Aramaic, and points to grammatical monstrosities therein as evidence that it was not originally written in Greek:
For the Apocalyptist the language of the New Dispensation of the Christian Church was Aramaic only. It is most significant that the numerous hymns and doxologies sung or recited by the saints and angels in heaven, in chapter after chapter of the book, are composed in Aramaic (wherever it is possible to decide), not in Hebrew; though the writer could have used either language. ....
There is excellent reason, however, for one conclusion he [R.H. Charles] reaches—expressed in similar words by many before him—namely, that "the linguistic character of the Apocalypse is absolutely unique." The grammatical monstrosities of the book, in their number and variety and especially in their startling character, stand alone in the history of literature. It is only in the Greek that they are apparent, for it is the form, not the sense, that is affected. A few of the more striking solecisms are exhibited here in English translation, so that any reader may see their nature.
1:4. “Grace to you, and peace, from he who is and who was and who is to come” (all nom. case). 1:15. “His legs were like burnished brass (neut. gend., dative case) as in a furnace purified (fem. gend., sing. no., gen. case)” 11:3. “My witnesses (nom.) shall prophesy for many days clothed (accus.) in sackcloth.” 14:14. “I saw on the cloud one seated like unto a son-of-man (accus.), having (nom.) upon his head a golden crown.” 14:19. “He harvested the vintage of the earth, and cast it into the winepress (fem.), the great [winepress] (masc.) of the wrath of God.” 17:4. “A golden cup filled with abominations (gen.) and with unclean things (accus.).” 19:20. “The lake of blazing fire (“fire,” neut.; “blazing,” fem.). 20:2. “And he seized the dragon (accus.), the old serpent (nom.), who is the Devil and Satan and bound him.” 21:9. “Seven angels, holding the seven bowls (accus.) filled (gen.) with the seven last plagues.” 22:5. “They have no need of lamplight (gen.) nor of sunlight (accus.).”
This apparent linguistic anarchy has no explanation on the Greek side. It is hardly surprising that to some readers it should have seemed open defiance of grammar, to others a symptom of mental aberration. Nevertheless there is method to it all. The more grotesque these barbarisms, the more certain it is that they are not due to lack of acquaintance with Greek.[23]
===========================================.
"Looks to me like the angel in the vision had flaming feet, flames that formed a pillar"
So you think the flames formed a pillar, but not the feet. While the Greek text says 'feet like pillars of fire.' Got it.
"thinks the legs in the vision were on fire"
No, the legs were like pillars of fire.
"the Syriac text, made centuries later, says the same thing as the Greek text"
Not exactly. Translating from the Syriac, one can sensibly translate into English 'legs were like pillars of fire.' Translating from the Greek, one gets 'feet like pillars of fire.' You disagree with the Greek, and think not the feet, but rather the flames, were like pillars.
A particular Syriac word could be rendered: hand; arm.
Another Syriac word could be rendered: feet; legs.
In Revelation, a better rendering of a particular Syriac word is not 'feet,' but rather 'legs.' The translator into Greek chose the inferior rendering, because legs are like pillars, while feet aren't like pillars.
============================================.
"your arguments that the first-century Greek New Testament is a translation from the 7th-century Syriac"
That's not my argument. The Peshitta is far older than the 7th century.
"the Peshitta here also says the same thing as the Greek, that Jesus had 'breasts', in Rev 1:13"
So you agree with me that the Greek says Jesus had breasts.
Rather than using στῆθος/ stethos/ chest, the Greek mss. for Revelation 1:13 speak of Jesus having μαστός/ mastos/ breasts.
According to the Greek mss. of the NT, Jesus is headed to hellfire, had feet that were like pillars, and had breasts.
================================================.
"We're talking about the book of Revelation. That wasn't added to the Peshitta until the 7th century"
Reference? Technically, the Peshitt_a_ lacks Revelation. The Peshitt_o_ has Revelation. The Church of the East closed its canon before Revelation became widely regarded as worthy of being considered scripture.
"the Greek in Rev 1:13 is masculine, making it appropriate"
So making a word typically used for female breasts have a masculine gender, and using the word to describe Jesus, means it's OK to say Jesus had mastos?
"the Peshitta also says breasts here"
A precise language, Greek is the language of science and math with a large vocabulary. It has
στῆθος/ stethos/ chest, and it has μαστός/ mastos/ breasts. The Greek Revelation says Jesus has mastos/ breasts.
"Rev 15:6 uses your word for chest"
Rev 15:6
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/revelation/15-6.htm
4738 stēthē/ στήθη/ chests
"So, the author, or translator as you imagine, had that word in his vocabulary. He just chose not to use it in Rev 1:13" Do you have an explanation of that?
Do you agree with this statement?: "the description τοῖς μαστοῖς in Rev. 1 about Jesus would be surprising to a Greek reader, and μαστός is not used of men in LXX or NT"
https://bulletin.equinoxpub.com/2014/12/...n-breasts/
See: Jesse Rainbow, "Male μαστοί in Revelation 1.13." Journal for the Study of the New Testament 30.2 (2007): 249-253.
Aaron Christianson says: .... Fact Check!
μαστός is used of the male chest as well. Tragedies of Aescylus, Choephoroe, line 545.
LSJ'd! (and not to worry, I TLG'd it too!) Rainbow needs to be careful before he publishes something that can be refuted by checking the most popular Greek Lexicon in existence… and you should Check too! It's online, after all; no excuse not to check.
That's not to say Jesus doesn't have tits, but I don't think it's a clear teaching from this scripture. I guess we'll have to wait for his glorious appearing to find out.
....
Deane Galbraith says: ....
Hmmmmm… reading the article again, it seems that the author examines only LXX and NT usage of μαστός. Yet, he does make the more general statement that a reference to male breasts "is as striking in Greek as it is in the English", which implies a more general claim. Aeschylus is not contemporary Greek, but, you're right, I should've cross-checked against the usages.
....
Deane Galbraith says: ....
... ok, Aeschylus has καὶ μαστὸν ἀμφέχασκ᾽ ἐμὸν θρεπτήριον in Choephoroe, line 545: a nourishing breast for a baby! This is clearly a woman's breast; man-breasts do not ordinarily provide nourishment. Is this your example of a man-breast?
Yet LSJ doesn't actually cite Aeschylus as an example of the male application of μαστός, but cites Choephoroe, line 545 as a general instance of its use. For a man-breast, LSJ cites some other souces: "of men's breasts, "βάλε δουρὶ στέρνον ὑπὲρ μαζοῖο" [Il.]4.528; "βάλε στῆθος παρὰ μαζόν" 8.121, cf. Od.22.82 [μαζόν], X.An.1.4.17, 4.3.6 [both τῶν μαστῶν]." So, we have three from Homer, and two in Xenophon's Anabasis, and a total of 291 citations. From a quick survey, the mastoi seem to be overwhelmingly women's. Even the metaphorical usage refers to spherical or cup-like objects. I haven't looked at this in any detail, but Rainbow’s conclusion seems to be correct: the description τοῖς μαστοῖς in Rev. 1 about Jesus would be surprising to a Greek reader, and μαστός is not used of men in LXX or NT.
Do you have an explanation of the Greek Revelation's grammatical monstrosities?
Argument from bad Greek grammar in Revelation to it not being originally Greek
https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Aramaic_origi...ent_theory
Torrey opines that Revelation was originally in Aramaic, and points to grammatical monstrosities therein as evidence that it was not originally written in Greek:
For the Apocalyptist the language of the New Dispensation of the Christian Church was Aramaic only. It is most significant that the numerous hymns and doxologies sung or recited by the saints and angels in heaven, in chapter after chapter of the book, are composed in Aramaic (wherever it is possible to decide), not in Hebrew; though the writer could have used either language. ....
There is excellent reason, however, for one conclusion he [R.H. Charles] reaches—expressed in similar words by many before him—namely, that "the linguistic character of the Apocalypse is absolutely unique." The grammatical monstrosities of the book, in their number and variety and especially in their startling character, stand alone in the history of literature. It is only in the Greek that they are apparent, for it is the form, not the sense, that is affected. A few of the more striking solecisms are exhibited here in English translation, so that any reader may see their nature.
1:4. “Grace to you, and peace, from he who is and who was and who is to come” (all nom. case). 1:15. “His legs were like burnished brass (neut. gend., dative case) as in a furnace purified (fem. gend., sing. no., gen. case)” 11:3. “My witnesses (nom.) shall prophesy for many days clothed (accus.) in sackcloth.” 14:14. “I saw on the cloud one seated like unto a son-of-man (accus.), having (nom.) upon his head a golden crown.” 14:19. “He harvested the vintage of the earth, and cast it into the winepress (fem.), the great [winepress] (masc.) of the wrath of God.” 17:4. “A golden cup filled with abominations (gen.) and with unclean things (accus.).” 19:20. “The lake of blazing fire (“fire,” neut.; “blazing,” fem.). 20:2. “And he seized the dragon (accus.), the old serpent (nom.), who is the Devil and Satan and bound him.” 21:9. “Seven angels, holding the seven bowls (accus.) filled (gen.) with the seven last plagues.” 22:5. “They have no need of lamplight (gen.) nor of sunlight (accus.).”
This apparent linguistic anarchy has no explanation on the Greek side. It is hardly surprising that to some readers it should have seemed open defiance of grammar, to others a symptom of mental aberration. Nevertheless there is method to it all. The more grotesque these barbarisms, the more certain it is that they are not due to lack of acquaintance with Greek.[23]
====================================================.
"Alexander the Great had Hellenized his kingdom, thus they all spoke Greek in addition to their native language. Thus the Jewish people spoke their language plus Greek"
Reference that "the Jewish people spoke their language plus Greek"?
Josephus, _Antiquities of the Jews_, XX, XI
I have also taken a great deal of pains to obtain the learning of the Greeks, and understand the elements of the Greek language … [yet] I cannot pronounce Greek with sufficient exactness; for our nation does NOT encourage those that learn the languages of many nations … because they [the Jews] look upon this sort of accomplishment as common [very lowly] … But they give him the testimony of being a wise man who is fully acquainted with our [Jewish] laws … [in contrast] as there have been many who have done their endeavors with great patience to obtain this [Greek] learning, there have yet hardly been so many as two or three that have succeeded therein, who were immediately well rewarded for their pains -- emphases added as cited in
25 Irrefutable Reasons Why the New Testament Was NOT Originally Written in Greek
https://www.biblicaltruths.com/25-irrefu...-in-greek/
"What good would it have done to write to the Roman, Corinthian, Ephesian, and other churches in Aramaic if they were pagans?"
Are you saying the Pauline epistles were written to pagans?
"No one would understand it"
Aramaic speakers were located in those cities. Paul's letters were written in Paul's native tongue-- Aramaic-- and translated into Greek, and circulated in Aramaic and Greek.
================================================.
"Wikipedia is not a real, legitimate, or scholarly acceptable source"
Is Torrey's _The Apocalypse of John: Introduction, Excerpts, and a New Translation_ (Yale University Press, 1958) a "real, legitimate, ... scholarly acceptable source"?
What's your explanation for the atrocious Greek grammar in the Greek Revelation?
Christopher Lancaster aka "Raphael Lataster," _Was the New Testament Really Written in Greek? A Concise Compendium of the Many Internal and External Evidences of Aramaic Peshitta Primacy_ (2011), 328pp.
14. Do we need to hate to become good Christians? – Luke 14:26 / Romans 9:13 / 1John 3:15 / 1John 4:20-21
Luke 14:26
The KJV says: “If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.”
The NIV says: “"If anyone comes to me and does not hate his father and mother, his wife and children, his brothers and sisters--yes, even his own life--he cannot be my disciple.”
Well the problem here is that we are to “love our neighbour” and “honour our parents”.
More specifically, we are seemingly told to hate our “brothers”, while this is clearly condemned:
1John 3:15
KJV: “Whosoever hateth his brother is a murderer: and ye know that no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him.”
NIV: “Anyone who hates his brother is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life in him.”
1John 4:20-21
KJV: “If a man say, I love God, and hateth his brother, he is a liar: for he that loveth not his brother whom he hath seen, how can he love God whom he hath not seen? And this commandment have we from him, That he who loveth God love his brother also.”
NIV: “If anyone says, "I love God," yet hates his brother, he is a liar. For anyone who does not love his brother, whom he has seen, cannot love God, whom he has not seen. And he has given us this command: Whoever loves God must also love his brother.”
A similar problem occurs with Romans 9:13, where our loving God is portrayed in a different light, by the Greek.
Romans 9:13
KJV: “As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated.”
NIV: “Just as it is written: "Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated."”
Once again, the Peshitta comes to the rescue.
The Lamsa says (Luke 14:26): “He who comes to me and does not put aside his father and his mother and his brothers and his sisters and his wife and his children and even his own life cannot be a disciple to me.”
The Lamsa says (Romans 9:13): “As it is written, Jacob have I loved but Esau have I set aside.”
The answer lies in the Aramaic word "0ns" (sone'). It can mean “to put aside” and “to hate”. Clearly He is teaching that in order to be His disciple, we must be able to put aside those we love, and even be prepared to give our lives.
As this error is caused by a mistranslated word, it is an example of a semi-split word.
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
"I have my proper translations in greek"
The Greek translation of the original Aramaic of the New Testament has mistranslations.
My response to Ehrman is below. How would you respond to him?
_Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (And Why We Don't Know About Them)_ by Bart D. Ehrman (2009), 292pp. On 36, 37
https://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Interrupted...061173940/
Joseph is not Jesus' father. But that creates an obvious problem. If Jesus is not a blood-relation to Joseph, why is it that Matthew and Luke trace Jesus' bloodline precisely through Joseph? This is a question that neither author answers: both accounts give a genealogy that can't be the genealogy of Jesus, since his only bloodline goes through Mary, yet neither author provides her genealogy. .... Luke explicitly indicates that the family line is that of Joseph, not Mary (Luke 1:23; also Matthew 1:16). ....
There are other problems. In ... Matthew's genealogy .... from the Babylonian disaster to the birth of Jesus, fourteen generations (1:17). Fourteen, fourteen, and fourteen-it is almost as if God had planned it this way. .... The problem is that the fourteen-fourteen-fourteen schema doesn't actually work. If you read through the names carefully, you'll see that in the third set of fourteen there are in fact only thirteen generations.
////////////////////////////
Matthew 1:17 says there are 14, 14, 14 generations.
Greek manuscripts of Matthew's genealogy mistakenly list 14, 14, 13 generations.
In Aramaic mss. of Matthew's genealogy, with Mt 1:16's "gbra" correctly translated as father/guardian, Matthew's genealogy lists 14, 14, 14 generations.
Mary had a father/guardian named Joseph (plus a husband also called Joseph).
Jesus is a descendant of King David on his biological mother Mary's side (per Mt's genealogy), and on his step-dad Joseph's side (per Lk's genealogy).
=============================================.
"Jesus spoke and taught in Greek"
Evidence?
The movie "The Passion of the Christ" was done in Aramaic. Was Mel Gibson mistaken in concluding that Jesus spoke Aramaic?
"and lived in Greek-speaking Judea"
Of what language is Acts 1:19's Hakeldama? (Greek?)
Acts 1:19 (Amplified Bible), https://biblehub.com/acts/1-19.htm
All the people in Jerusalem learned about this, so in their own dialect—Aramaic—they called the piece of land Hakeldama, that is, Field of Blood.)
Do you agree with me that "Talitha kum" is a transliteration of Aramaic?
Mark 5:41 (Amplified Bible), https://biblehub.com/mark/5-41.htm
Taking the child’s hand, He said [tenderly] to her, “Talitha kum!”—which translated [from Aramaic] means, “Little girl, I say to you, get up!”
==========================================.
"Peshitta translation wasn't completed until 616 by Thomas of Harqel"
The Harklean is a stilted, clearly-translated translation from Greek, and is very different from the Aramaic Peshitta. Do you think Michaelis was mistaken in having high esteem for the Peshitta?
Johann David Michaelis, _Introduction to the New Testament, tr., and augmented with notes (and a Dissertation on the origin and composition of the three first gospels)_ as translated by Herbert Marsh, 4 vols., vol. 2 part 1 (1802), 40+
https://books.google.com/books?id=Y1gHAAAAQAAJ&pg=PA39
The Peshito is the very best translation of the Greek Testament that I have ever read; that of Luther, though in some respects inferior to his translation of the Old Testament, holding the second rank. Of all the Syriac authors, with which I am acquainted, not excepting Ephrem and BarHebræus, its language is the most elegant and pure, not loaded with foreign words, like the Philoxenian version, and other later writings, and discovers the hand of a master, in rendering those passages, where the two idioms deviate from each other. It has no marks of the stiffness of a translation, but is written with the ease and fluency of an original; and this excellence of style must be ascribed to its antiquity, and to its being written in a city that was the residence of Syrian kings. See Rom. ix. 20. xiii. 1. Heb. vii. 3. 8. Acts v. 37. xix. 39. xxii. 3. xxvii. 3. compared with the first section of the Curæ in Act. Apost. Syr. where I have pointed out the excellent manner in which the the Syriac translator has rendered the Greek phrases, and in the third and sixth section of the Curæ other examples are quoted.
....
Beside the critical use of the Syriac version, which will be examined in the following section, it leads us sometimes to just and beautiful explanations, where other help is insufficient, for instance Matth. vi. 7. John xvi. 2. Rom. ix. 22. xiii. 3. and confirms some ancient rites, in which we are deeply interested, such as the celebration of Sunday, 1 Cor. xi. 20. And in discovering either the meaning of an unusual word, or the unusual meaning of a common word, where no assistance can be had from the Greek authors, the Syriac version may be of singular service, as the translator was probably acquainted with the language of common life, as well as with the language of books, and is at least of equal authority with a Greek lexicon of later ages.
....
SECT. IX.
Critical use of the Syriac version.
THE chief advantage to be derived from the Syriac version is, in applying it to the purposes of criticism. Its high antiquity, and frequent deviation from the common reading, in passages of importance, must recommend the use of it to every critic, who in general will find himself rewarded for his trouble.
=======================================.
"source says, 'The dialect of Jerusalem was East-Aramæan, or, as we call it, Chaldee, and according to this dialect are written the Aramæan words that are found in the Greek Testament, for instance Acts i. 19. 1 Cor. xvi. 22. The Syriac New Testament is written in the same language, but in a different dialect. ' That's what I told you"
Do you agree with me that Greek mss. for Acts 1:19 and 1 Cor 16:22 contain transliterations of Aramaic words, specifically Akeldama and Maranatha?
Acts 1:19 (NIV)
Everyone in Jerusalem heard about this, so they called that field in their language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.)
1 Corinthians 16:22 (Amplified Bible), https://biblehub.com/1_corinthians/16-22.htm
If anyone does not love the Lord [does not obey and respect and believe in Jesus Christ and His message], he is to be accursed. Maranatha (O our Lord, come)!
"the Peshitta was written centuries later by translating from the Greek"
Evidence from the Peshitta that it's a translation?
"And, in dialect different from the Aramaic words in the NT"
What Aramaic dialect is here?:
Mark 15:34 (Berean Literal)
https://biblehub.com/mark/15-34.htm
And at the ninth hour Jesus cried out in a loud voice, "Eloi, Eloi, lama sabachthani?" Which is translated, "My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?"
"different from the Aramaic of the time and place of Jesus"
Reference?
"attack the Bible"
Re: Jeremiah, my response to Bible critic and ex-Christian Ehrman is below. How would you respond to him?
_Jesus, Interrupted: Revealing the Hidden Contradictions in the Bible (And Why We Don't Know About Them)_ by Bart D. Ehrman (2009), 292pp., 51
https://www.amazon.com/Jesus-Interrupted...061173940/
3. _Why does Matthew quote the wrong prophet?_ When Matthew indicates that Judas betrayed Jesus for thirty pieces of silver, he notes (as by now we expect of him) that this was in fulfillment of Scripture: "Then was fulfilled what had been spoken through the prophet Jeremiah, And they took the thirty pieces of silver ... and they gave them for the potter's field" (Mathew 27:9-10). The problem is that this prophecy is not found in Jeremiah. It appears to be a loose quotation of Zechariah 11:3.
////////////////////////////
For Mt 27:9-10, Greek manuscripts have the erroneous addition that Jeremiah said a particular remark, when there's no Old Testament evidence that Jeremiah said that. The Aramaic original leaves unspecified the name of the prophet, avoiding an unnecessary contradiction:
(based on Younan)
"Then the thing was fulfilled which was spoken of by the prophet who said,
"I took the thirty (pieces) of silver,
the price of the precious one
which (those) from the sons of Israel agreed upon."
=============================================.
"Aramaic was known as the language of the Jews"
Was it the language of anyone else?
Daniel 2:4 (English Standard Version), https://biblehub.com/daniel/2-4.htm
Then the Chaldeans said to the king in Aramaic, "O king, live forever! Tell your servants the dream, and we will show the interpretation."
"That doesn't mean that it was the language was common among the Jews. It means the language was particular to the Jews"
Do you think the individuals named Rehum and Shimshai were Jews?
Ezra 4:7-8, https://biblehub.com/ezra/4-8.htm
7 And in the days of Artaxerxes king of Persia, Bishlam, Mithredath, Tabeel, and the rest of his associates wrote a letter to Artaxerxes. It was written in Aramaic and then translated.
8 Rehum the commander and Shimshai the scribe wrote the letter against Jerusalem to King Artaxerxes as follows:
From
https://biblehub.com/commentaries/ezra/4-8.htm
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary
Ezr 4:7-24. Letter to Artaxerxes.
7. in the days of Artaxerxes wrote Bishlam, &c.—The three officers named are supposed to have been deputy governors appointed by the king of Persia over all the provinces subject to his empire west of the Euphrates.
the Syrian tongue—or Aramæan language, called sometimes in our version, Chaldee. This was made use of by the Persians in their decrees and communications relative to the Jews (compare 2Ki 18:26; Isa 36:11). The object of their letter was to press upon the royal notice the inexpediency and danger of rebuilding the walls of Jerusalem. They labored hard to prejudice the king's mind against that measure.
....
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
8. At this verse begins the first long section (Ezra 4:8 to Ezra 6:18) written in the Aramaic language (see Introd.), which the Compiler has probably extracted bodily from Aramaic records.
Ezra 4:8 introduces briefly the description of the letter of accusation against the Jews sent by Rehum and Shimshai.
=====================================.
"Jesus' words in the New Testament are Greek in origin and bear no marks of being a translation from Aramaic"
So "Talitha cum," "Ephphatha," "Abba," "Raca," and "Eli Eli lema sabachthani" is Greek?
What Verses in the New Testament Are Aramaic? - Aug 2, 2019
https://bustedhalo.com/ministry-resource...re-aramaic
Talitha cum meaning “Little girl, get up!” (Mark 5:41)
Ephphatha meaning “Be opened.” (Mark 7:34)
Abba meaning “Father” (Mark 14:36)
Raca meaning “fool” (Matthew 5:22)
Rabbouni meaning “teacher” (John 20:16)
Eli Eli lema sabachthani meaning “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46)
Hosanna meaning “O Lord, save us.” (Mark 11:9)
Maranatha meaning “Lord, come!” (1 Corinthians 16:22)
Mark 7:34 (Amplified Bible), https://biblehub.com/mark/7-34.htm
and looking up to heaven, He sighed deeply and said to the man, “Ephphatha,” which [in Aramaic] means, “Be opened and released!”
Mark 15:34 (The Passion Translation)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se...ersion=TPT
34 About three o’clock, Jesus shouted with a mighty voice in Aramaic,[a] “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?”—that is, “My God, My God, why have you turned your back on me?”[b]
a: The last words of Jesus were spoken in Aramaic. Every Greek text gives a transliteration of the Aramaic words and then translates them back into Greek.
b: See Pss. 22:1; 42:9. The Aramaic can be translated “For this purpose you have spared me.” [df: better: "My God, My God, why have you spared me?" as in, 'can't we just get this over with?']
Matthew 5:22 (The Passion Translation)
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?se...ersion=TPT
But I’m telling you, if you hold anger in your heart toward a fellow believer, you are subject to judgment. And whoever demeans and insults[c] a fellow believer is answerable to the congregation. And whoever calls down curses upon a fellow believer is in danger of being sent to a fiery hell.
c: The Aramaic is raca and can mean “spittle” or “lunatic.” It is a word that could imply calling a fellow believer demon-possessed. The Greek is “worthless fool, imbecile.”
=================================================.
"Every time someone in the New Testament someone spoke Aramaic, the Jews didn't understand what was being said"
2 examples?
"Several times there's references to Aramaic, as if it's notable. But, no references to anyone deviating to Greek. Just like when you're reading common English articles, there's no mention English being used"
'Bar' appears several times in names in the NT, e.g. Barabbas (Son of the Father), Barnabas (Son of Encouragement), Bar-Jesus, Bar-Jonah (Son of a Dove), Barsabas, Bartholomew, and Bar-Timaeus. Is 'Bar' Greek?
"Do you think Pontius Pilate new Aramaic?"
I doubt it. I imagine he had a translator.
"The Jews never had any issues conversing with Romans"
2 instances?
"The Jews never had any issues conversing with... any of the numerous Jews from far off who spoke other languages (see Acts 2)"
Do you think the people that make pilgrimages to Mecca have any difficulties understanding the languages of their fellow pilgrims?
"there's no indication that Jews ever switched to Greek to communicate with anyone"
Not even Paul?
Acts 21:37
https://biblehub.com/acts/21-37.htm
(NIV) As the soldiers were about to take Paul into the barracks, he asked the commander, "May I say something to you?" "Do you speak Greek?" he replied.
(New Living) As Paul was about to be taken inside, he said to the commander, “May I have a word with you?” “Do you know Greek?” the commander asked, surprised.
===========================================.
Matthew 27 (Berean Study Bible)
https://biblehub.com/bsb/matthew/27.htm
9 Then what was spoken through Jeremiah the prophet was fulfilled:
“They took the thirty pieces of silver,
the price set on Him by the people of Israel,
10 and they gave them for the potter’s field,
as the Lord had commanded me.”
"Matthew 27 references Jeremiah 32"
In these verses?:
Jeremiah 32 (Berean Study Bible)
https://biblehub.com/bsb/jeremiah/32.htm#6
6 Jeremiah replied, “The word of the LORD came to me, saying:
7 Behold! Hanamel, the son of your uncle Shallum, is coming to you to say, ‘Buy for yourself my field in Anathoth, for you have the right of redemption to buy it.’
8 Then, as the LORD had said, my cousin Hanamel came to me in the courtyard of the guard and urged me, ‘Please buy my field in Anathoth in the land of Benjamin, for you own the right of inheritance and redemption. Buy it for yourself.’ ”
Then I knew that this was the word of the LORD.
9 So I bought the field in Anathoth from my cousin Hanamel, and I weighed out seventeen shekels of silver.
========================================.
"If our New Testament were a translation, then 'bar' would have been translated"
Translated from what language?
"The Jews spoke Greek, but used some loan words"
Is 'bar' as in 'son of' a loan word? If 'yes,' from what language?
"The Bible provides no hint of a translator"
Is there anywhere in the Bible where use of a translator is mentioned?
"Most Muslims who go to Mecca are fluent in Arabic"
Reference?
Including those Muslims from Indonesia, Pakistan, India, and Bangladesh?
Are all the Muslims who go to Mecca able to understand each other?
Which Countries Have the Highest Number of Hajj Pilgrims in 2017? - Aug 27, 2017
https://ilmfeed.com/countries-highest-nu...rims-2017/
Millions apply from Muslim-majority countries but due to a quota system, not everyone is able to come – the Saudi authorities usually allocate 1,000 places for each million Muslim per country.
The following graphic shows the top 10 countries who have the highest numbers of Hajj pilgrims in 2017:
1. Indonesia – 221,000
2. Pakistan – 179,210
3. India – 170,000
4. Bangladesh – 127,198
5. Egypt – 108,000
6. Iran – 86,500
7. Nigeria – 79,000
8. Turkey – 79,000
9. Algeria – 36,000
10. Morocco – 31,000
Source: Al Jazeera
"Unlike Christians who aren't even expected to read the Bible in English, Muslims expect their fellow Muslims to learn Arabic to read the Koran in Arabic. So, many of the Muslims in Indonesia do speak Arabic"
What percent of "Muslims in Indonesia do speak Arabic"? (10%?)
Is this correct?: "The bits of Quran and basic religious greetings and phrases (al-salaamu alaykoom) would be all the Arabic most non-Arab Muslims would know"
Arabic letters are phonetic, making it easy to sound out written Arabic words. But that's a very different matter than understanding spoken Arabic. Rote memorization of portions of the Quran is done worldwide by non-Arabic Muslims, but just because they memorize it, and just because they can pronounce the written words, that doesn't mean they understand it. Numerous non-Arabic Muslims 'read' the Quran without having the foggiest idea of what they're 'reading.'
Do Muslims understand Arabic?
https://www.quora.com
Most don’t, because most Muslims speak other languages. The countries with the largest Muslim populations and their languages are, according to Wikipedia: Indonesia (205m, mostly Indonesian), Pakistan (178m, Urdu and Sindi), India (172m, many), Bangladesh (146m, Bengali) and Nigeria (94m, many). An Arabic-speaking country doesn’t break into the table until a tie for sixth (Egypt, Iran and Turkey are all about 75m). I’m guessing that native Arabic speakers form only about 20% of Muslims worldwide.
Most Muslims memorize at least a couple of chapters (suras) of the Quran in Arabic, but that isn’t the same as understanding the language. The bits of Quran and basic religious greetings and phrases (al-salaamu alaykoom) would be all the Arabic most non-Arab Muslims would know, other than those who worked in an Arab country or studied the Quran and other religious literature seriously.
"They all spoke Greek, in addition to the visitors peaking their local languages"
Was a miracle involved in those gathered into Jerusalem from around the world understanding Peter?
Do you think everybody that heard Peter's speech in Acts 2 spoke both Greek and another language, i.e. the language of their region of origin?
Do you think Peter's speech was in Greek?
=============================================.
"You believe the Greek NT was translated from Aramaic"
Do you think the parents who named their children these names had Greek as their native language?:
Barabbas (Son of the Father), Barnabas (Son of Encouragement), Bar-Jesus, Bar-Jonah (Son of a Dove), Barsabas, Bartholomew, and Bar-Timaeus.
"There are a number of examples where we're told someone couldn't understand someone else"
OK.
"Peter's speech was in Greek"
Do you think that when Peter made his speech, he spoke of God freeing/loosing Jesus from "the _agony/pains_ of death"?
Acts 2:24
https://biblehub.com/acts/2-24.htm
(NIV) But God raised him from the dead, freeing him from the agony of death,
because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him.
(NKJV) whom God raised up, having loosed the pains of death,
because it was not possible that He should be held by it.
mistranslation for Acts 2:24
https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Aramaic_origi...ent_theory
When translated well it reads: "But Allaha [God] loosed the cords of Sheol [the Grave/Death] and raised him [Yeshua/Jesus] because it was not possible that he be held in it, in Sheol." The Greek versions mistranslated the word "cords" as 'pain.' (cf. Jn 2:15 & 2 Samuel 22:6) —Paul Younan
"Peter's speech was in Greek"
Do you think that when Peter made his speech, he commented:
"The Lord said to my Lord"?
"Master YHWH said to my Lord"?
Acts 2:34 (NIV), https://biblehub.com/acts/2-34.htm
For David did not ascend to heaven, and yet he said,
"'The Lord said to my Lord: "Sit at my right hand
Acts 2:34, https://biblehub.com/interlinear/acts/2-34.htm
.... Said the
2962 Kyrios Κύριος Lord
to
2962 Kyriō Κυρίῳ [the] Lord
of me Sit at [the] right hand of Me
Acts 2:34 (Peshitta Holy Bible)
https://biblehub.com/aramaic-plain-english/acts/2.htm
"For David had not ascended to Heaven, because he said,
"THE LORD JEHOVAH said to my Lord, 'Sit at my right hand',
Acts 2:34 (based on Younan), http://dukhrana.com
34-35. For it was not (that) Dawid did ascend into Heaven, because he said,
MrYa said to Mari [Master YHWH said to my Lord],
Sit yourself at my right hand,
until I place your enemies (as) a footstool for your feet'.'
=====================================.
"To the Greek-speaking Jews of Jerusalem, these were just ancestral names honoring their religious heritage.... people who gave their kids Hebraic-derived names spoke Greek"
Do you think the angel that spoke to Joseph re: the naming of Jesus spoke Greek to Joseph?
'Yeshua' means 'Salvation' in Aramaic and Hebrew. What does 'Ἰησοῦν' mean?
Matthew 1:21 (NIV)
https://biblehub.com/matthew/1-21.htm
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/matthew/1-21.htm
She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus [Greek:
Iēsoun/ Ἰησοῦν], because he will save his people from their sins."
========================================================.
"It's nonsense to say that Jesus only has meaning in"
What does Ἰησοῦν mean? ('Salvation'?)
What connection is there between Ἰησοῦν and "because he will save his people from their sins"?
Matthew 1:21 (NIV)
https://biblehub.com/matthew/1-21.htm
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/matthew/1-21.htm
She will give birth to a son, and you are to give him the name Jesus [Greek:
Iēsoun/ Ἰησοῦν], because he will save his people from their sins."
"the angel who spoke to Joseph spoke Greek"
Do you think _Antiquity of the Jews_ by Josephus was initially written in Greek?
Flavius Josephus, _The Wars of the Jews_
perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0148
....and while their writings contain sometimes accusations, and sometimes encomiums, but no where the accurate truth of the facts; I have proposed to myself, for the sake of such as live under the government of the Romans, to translate those books into the Greek tongue, which I formerly composed in the language of our country, and sent to the Upper Barbarians; 3 Joseph, the son of Matthias, by birth a Hebrew, a priest also, and one who at first fought against the Romans myself, and was forced to be present at what was done afterwards, [am the author of this work].
Flavius Josephus, _Against Apion_
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text...99.01.0216
1 I SUPPOSE that by my books of the Antiquity of the Jews, most excellent Epaphroditus, 2 have made it evident to those who peruse them, that our Jewish nation is of very great antiquity, and had a distinct subsistence of its own originally; as also, I have therein declared how we came to inhabit this country wherein we now live. Those Antiquities contain the history of five thousand years, and are taken out of our sacred books, but are translated by me into the Greek tongue.
Josephus, _Antiquities of the Jews_, XX, XI
I have also taken a great deal of pains to obtain the learning of the Greeks, and understand the elements of the Greek language … [yet] I cannot pronounce Greek with sufficient exactness; for our nation does NOT encourage those that learn the languages of many nations … because they [the Jews] look upon this sort of accomplishment as common [very lowly] … But they give him the testimony of being a wise man who is fully acquainted with our [Jewish] laws … [in contrast] as there have been many who have done their endeavors with great patience to obtain this [Greek] learning, there have yet hardly been so many as two or three that have succeeded therein, who were immediately well rewarded for their pains -- emphases added as cited in
25 Irrefutable Reasons Why the New Testament Was NOT Originally Written in Greek
https://www.biblicaltruths.com/25-irrefu...-in-greek/
============================================.
"errors"
Translation from the original Aramaic to Greek to English yields this rather strange remark:
Romans 5:7 NIV
Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous person,
though for a good person someone might possibly dare to die.
Translating directly from the original Aramaic yields a much more sensible remark:
Murdock; Lamsa
http://www.dukhrana.com/peshitta/index.php
- (for rarely doth one die for the ungodly;
though for the good, some one perhaps might venture to die. . . .
- Hardly would any man die for the sake of the wicked:
but for the sake of the good, one might be willing to die.
"When Josephus said he had trouble speaking Greek with exactness, he only meant without a Judean accent. Given that we know for a fact he wrote a lot in Greek, we know he was fluent in Greek"
Were Josephus's initial drafts in Greek?
Do you think _Antiquity of the Jews_ by Josephus was initially written in Greek?
Flavius Josephus, _The Wars of the Jews_
perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.01.0148
....and while their writings contain sometimes accusations, and sometimes encomiums, but no where the accurate truth of the facts; I have proposed to myself, for the sake of such as live under the government of the Romans, to translate those books into the Greek tongue, which I formerly composed in the language of our country, and sent to the Upper Barbarians; 3 Joseph, the son of Matthias, by birth a Hebrew, a priest also, and one who at first fought against the Romans myself, and was forced to be present at what was done afterwards, [am the author of this work].
Flavius Josephus, _Against Apion_
http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text...99.01.0216
1 I SUPPOSE that by my books of the Antiquity of the Jews, most excellent Epaphroditus, 2 have made it evident to those who peruse them, that our Jewish nation is of very great antiquity, and had a distinct subsistence of its own originally; as also, I have therein declared how we came to inhabit this country wherein we now live. Those Antiquities contain the history of five thousand years, and are taken out of our sacred books, but are translated by me into the Greek tongue.
"explain to me why there's not one remnant of Aramaic scripter from the first or second century?"
The Aramaic Dead Sea Scrolls - 11 Sept 2018
biblicalarchaeology.org
Since Hebrew was the language of Israelite tradition, scripture, and culture, some may be surprised to hear that many of the Dead Sea Scrolls are in Aramaic, the common language of Jesus’s time. .... The tally of the Qumran Aramaic texts includes more than 30 literary works, which represent about 12 percent of the Dead Sea Scrolls.
_Targum and Translation: A Reconsideration of the Qumran Aramaic Version of Job_
amazon.com
https://www.amazon.com/Targum-Translatio...023240170/
"explain why the Peshitta is written in a dialect that didn't exist in the time and place of Jesus"
What dialect is that? What dialects are in the Aramaic Mark 15:34?
b) Mark 15:34 (Younan)
And in the ninth hour, Yeshua cried out in a loud voice and said,
"'Ail! Ail! Lamna shwaqthani?'",
that is,
"'Allahi! Allahi! Lamna shwaqthani?'"
Note how both the first phrase and the recasting of it have "Lamna shwaqthani."
Also, "Allahi" is Aramaic for 'my Allaha,' while 'Ail' strikes me as being 'El'-- short for 'Elohim' i.e. a Hebrew term for 'God.' In the OT, both Daniel and Michael have 'El'-- short for 'Elohim'-- as part of their names.
B) Mark 15:34 (HCSB), biblegateway.com
And at three Jesus cried out with a loud voice,
"Eloi, Eloi, lema sabachthani?"
which is translated,
"My God, My God, why have You forsaken Me?"
transliteration of the Greek transliteration of the original Aramaic: eloi eloi lema sabachthani
transliteration of the Greek translation: ho ego theos ho ego theos eis tis enkataleipo ego
Notice the stark dissimilarity of the transliteration and translation.
"produced centuries later by known translators?"
What translators produced the Peshitta?
"Why didn't the first century Christians preserve any of Jesus' words in their original language, if it were Aramaic"
There's Jesus' words in Aramaic in the NT:
What Verses in the New Testament Are Aramaic? - Aug 2, 2019
https://bustedhalo.com/ministry-resource...re-aramaic
Talitha cum meaning “Little girl, get up!” (Mark 5:41)
Ephphatha meaning “Be opened.” (Mark 7:34)
Abba meaning “Father” (Mark 14:36)
Raca meaning “fool” (Matthew 5:22)
Rabbouni meaning “teacher” (John 20:16)
Eli Eli lema sabachthani meaning “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46)
Hosanna meaning “O Lord, save us.” (Mark 11:9)
Maranatha meaning “Lord, come!” (1 Corinthians 16:22)
"how come in the New Testament, there's not one example of anyone speaking Aramaic to a group of Jews and the Jews showing understanding?"
There's Jesus' words in Aramaic in the NT-- see above.
"there are examples of people speaking Aramaic and the Jews not understanding"
References?
===============================================.
"the Peshitta wasn't written until centuries the Greek New Testament was written"
Evidence?
"you don't accidentally translate nothing into the word Greek"
Do you think calling the woman who spoke of table crumbs 'Greek' was purposeful?
"it is unfortunate that sometimes translators drop text to remove a perceived contradiction. So, the Peshitta leaving out this detail suggests the Peshitta is the translation"
So you think the woman really was Greek?
The Peshitta says she was a pagan/heathen. Do you think she was a pagan?
"The New Testament often contrasts Jews vs. Greeks, even when the Greek nationality isn't properly meant"
When the NT refers to 'Greeks,' to what does it refer?
=========================================.
"Tatian wrote an Aramaic.... That was the late second century"
I see.
"he didn't write from an Aramaic source"
The footnotes in Hogg's translation of the 'Arabic Diatesseron' included in the Ante-Nicene Fathers series, make cclear that it was translated from Syriac/Aramaic into Arabic. Have you examined the footnotes therein?
https://netzarimemunah.org/2019/05/25/the-diatessaron/
[9] The Arabic word ordinarily means tribe or nation, but in this work it regularly represents the Syriac word used in the N.T. for ‘generation.’ ....
[14] Here and elsewhere the Arabic translator uses life, live, and give life, as in Syriac, for salvation, etc. ....
[88] So in the Arabic. It is, however, simply a misinterpretation of the expression in the Syriac versions, for at the place of toll (cf. Ibn-at-Tayyib’s Commentary). ....
[90] Lit. son-of-the-roofs, a Syriac expression (cf. § 24, 31, note). ....
[258] Lit. fattens, as in Peshitta. ....
[291] Represents a mistaken vocalisation of the Peshitta. ....
[421] Lit. The son-of-the-roof, a Syriac phrase meaning a demon of lunacy.
[422] A word used in Arabic of the devil producing insanity; but here it reproduces the Peshitta....
Concluding note in the Borgian mss. of the 'Arabic Diatesseron,' in
J. Hamlyn Hill, _The earliest life of Christ ever compiled from the four Gospels, being the Diatessaron of Tatian (circ. A.D. 160) Literally translated from the Arabic version and containing the four Gospels woven into one story_
https://archive.org/stream/earliestlifeo...h_djvu.txt
The Gospel is concluded, which Tatian compiled out of the four
Gospels of the four holy apostles the blessed evangelists, on
whom be peace, and which he named _Diatessaron_, that is, That
which is composed of four. The excellent and learned presbyter,
Abu-l-Faraj Abdullah Ibn-at-Tayyib, with whom may God be
pleased, translated it from Syriac into Arabic, from a copy
written by the hand of Gubasi ibn Ali Al-mutayyib, a disciple
of Hunain ibn Ishak, on both of whom may God have mercy.
Amen.
Do you think Tatian translated the 4 Greek gospels into Aramaic, and then from that translation into Aramaic compiled his Diatesseron?
Bruce Metzger, _The Early Versions of the New Testament: Their Origin, Transmission, and
Limitations_, 11-12
PDF: http://www.baytagoodah.com/uploads/9/5/6...tament.pdf
It is evident that Tatian went about composing his Diatessaron
with great diligence. Probably he worked from four separate
manuscripts, one for each of the Gospels, and, as he wove together
phrases, now from this Gospel and now that, he would no doubt
cross out those phrases in the manuscripts from which he was
copying. Otherwise it is difficult to understand how he was able
to combine so successfully phrases from four documents into a
remarkable cento which reminds one of delicate filigree work.
"if the Greek says Jesus is in danger of Hell, so does the Peshitta"
Actually, the Peshitta doesn't: 2 different words are used in Peshitta Matthew 5:22 & 23:17. In contrast, the Greek translation uses the same Greek word, Strong's #3474.
===================================================.
According to Gorgias Press's single volume Peshitta NT (2020), 661pp., pg 63
https://www.gorgiaspress.com/new-testame...h-overview
the verb in Peshitta Matthew 21:14 can be understood either as
'they brought to him the blind and the lame'
or as
'the blind and the lame came to him.'
The Greek translator of the Aramaic understood it as the latter.
Which do you think is the better understanding?
Matthew 21:14
https://biblehub.com/matthew/21-14.htm
(NIV)
The blind and the lame came to him at the temple,
and he healed them.
(King James)
And the blind and the lame came to him in the temple;
and he healed them.
(Aramaic Bible in Plain English)
And they brought to him in The Temple the blind and the lame,
and he healed them.
"the Peshitta was produced in a dialect that didn't exist Jesus' time"
Evidence?
"produced centuries after the Greek Gospels were written"
Evidence? Produced by who? And exactly when?
"if the Greek Matthew says Jesus is in danger of Hell fire"
That's what the Greek Matthew says.
"Jesus is not in danger of Hell fire"
According to the Greek Matthew, he is.
==========================================.
"I don't think Tatian translated the four Gospels into Aramaic and then compiled them them in his Diatesseron. I think he produced a compilation because it was easier than a direct translation of each of the Gospels"
Do you think Tatian worked with Greek gospels to synthesize his Diatesseron, and he then translated his Diatesseron into Aramaic?
"if distinct Aramaic Gospel translations existed, the Syriac Christian community would have been using them instead of the Diatesseron, and they weren't"
The Eastern Syriac Christian community had and was & is the preserver of the 4 'separated gospels,' plus the rest of the NT writings they were the custodians of, i.e. the NT except for the 'Western Five' (2 Peter, 2 Jn, 3 Jn, Jude, and Revelation).
"Wikipadia says 'Tatian's most influential work is the Diatessaron, a Biblical paraphrase, or 'harmony', of the four gospels that became the standard text of the four gospels in the Syriac-speaking churches until the 5th-century, after which it gave way to the four separate gospels in the Peshitta version.'"
Did the Syriac-speaking churches have Acts, Romans, the Pauline epistles, Hebrews, etc. prior to the 5th-century?
"why would Syriac speaking churches use a paraphrase with the four gospels combined into one book, if they had four separate gospels"
When out and about, I have a NT + Psalms and Proverbs. I don't carry a complete Bible. That I carry a NT + Ps + Prov doesn't mean I lack a complete Bible.
If a church reads every Sunday a chapter of the Diatesseron, that doesn't mean that that church lacks the entire NT.
Going thru the Diatesseron throughout the year is a convenient way to go thru the life of Christ in a year.
Books were expensive and hard to produce. It's easier to write out copies of the Diatesseron by hand than it is to write out copies of the 4 Gospels by hand.
It's easier to write out copies of the Diatesseron by hand than it is to write out copies of the entire NT by hand.
The Diatesseron was wildly popular in Syria, and there were far more copies of it in Syria than there were copies of the entire NT in Syria.
==============================================.
"where, before the 5th century were those four Gospels that you think were written in the Syriac language, in the first century, by Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John?"
Before Acts, Romans, the Pauline epistles, Hebrews, and the other NT books the Church of the East carefully copied and recopied through the years.
"why did Syriac Christians eventually start using the four Gospels"
From the outset, Syriac Christians had the 4 gospels direct from the authors' pens.
"Why didn't the rich or scholarly Christians spring for the expensive copies of each of the four Gospels sooner?"
I imagine some did.
How would you respond to this?:
J. de Zwaan, "John Wrote in Aramaic" _Journal of Biblical Literature_ (1938), 155-171, 161
https://www.jstor.org/stable/3259746
John 13^13 Ὑμεῖς φωνεῖτέ με Ὁ διδάσκαλος καί Ὁ κύριος is bad Greek, just about as astonishing as if one should say in English: "you cry me teacher and lord." The right word, which John knew quite well, would have been καλεῖτε. Why did he ever write φωνεῖν?
=====================================================.
Do you agree there's an Aramaism in "ἐγώ εἰμι-- ἡ ἄμπελος"?
Do you agree that "the constant use of the personal pronoun through the book" of John "is due in large part to the Aramaic participial construction which generally required a pronoun"?
John 15:5, https://biblehub.com/interlinear/john/15-5.htm
Egō Ἐγώ I
eimi εἰμι am
hē ἡ the
ampelos ἄμπελος vine
James A. Montgomery, _The Origin of the Gospel According to St. John_ (1923), 30pp., 18-19
https://archive.org/stream/originofgospe...t_djvu.txt
Another frequent idiom is that of the nominal predicate,
e. g., such a sentence as “I am the Vine”. In the many cases of
this self-assertion of Jesus the wording always is,
ἐγώ εἰμι-- ἡ ἄμπελος, etc. The use of both pronoun and the predicate
verb is hardly Greek, which would generally find one or the other term
sufficient. But the usage represents a Semitism, particularly
an Aramaism, namely in this case _ena hu gefitta_, which the Greek
spells out laboriously by three words, rendering the _hu_ “it”
(literally, “I am it, the vine”, cf. the similar French idiom), by
the predicate verb.
This consideration also explains the dominant use of “I”
(ἐγώ) in the Gospel-- which I had been wont to ascribe
to the divine consciousness of Jesus, or that consciousness
as alleged by the author. But this explanation is not necessary.
John Baptist says equally: “Not _am I_ the Christ”.
It is also to be noted that the constant use of the personal pronoun
through the book is due in large part to the Aramaic participial
construction which generally required a pronoun. To take an example
at hazard: the Baptist says, 3, 28, “Ye witness that I said (εἶπον
ἐγὼ), Not am I the Christ.” WH brackets the first ἐγώ on textual
grounds, but I would judge philologically that the apparently
superfluous pronoun represents the original Aramaic thought.
John 3:28
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/john/3-28.htm
https://biblehub.com/greek/3754.htm
eipon εἶπον I said
hoti [ὅτι] that
Ouk Οὐκ Not
eimi εἰμὶ am
egō ἐγὼ I
ho ὁ the
Christos Χριστός Christ
=======================
"From John 21:16 we know the Greek is the original because the Syriac lacks the vocabulary for an accurate and direct translation"
What do you think of this reasoning?:
'From John 21:16 we know the German is the original because the Syriac lacks the vocabulary for an accurate and direct translation.'
"If the Greek were the translation, it would be an accurate an direct translation of the wording of the Syriac"
The Greek translator of the original Aramaic knew the meaning of "amri [my lambs/ young sheep]" and "airbi [my rams/ adult male sheep]," but didn't know the meaning of "nequthi [my ewes/ adult female sheep]," so he rendered the Aramaic as "arnion [lambs].... probaton [adult sheep/ goats].... probaton."
"if the Syriac was the original, how does the same word, in the same context, in the same verse get transformed into two different words in the Greek translation?"
Which word are you referring to?
"you'd have to think almost every verse of the Greek New Testament is riddled with dumb mistakes"
The Greek translation of the Aramaic is a decent translation. Like almost all translations, it could use improvement.
"In reality, it's the Syriac that is off, and not because of dumb mistakes, but because of the limitations of the Syriac language"
What limitations do you refer to? Syriac has been used to compose elaborate poems that make sense when read, _and when read backward_.
===============================================.
"From John 21:16 we know the Greek is the original because the Syriac lacks the vocabulary for an accurate and direct translation"
Some people claim that the NT was originally in Hebrew. What do you think of this reasoning?:
'From John 21:16 we know the Hebrew is the original because the Syriac lacks the vocabulary for an accurate and direct translation.'
Also, what vocabulary is lacking in Syriac?
James A. Montgomery, _The Origin of the Gospel According to St. John_ (1923), 30pp., 30
https://archive.org/stream/originofgospe...t_djvu.txt
CONCLUSION
The end of my argument is this: That the Gospel of St. John
is the composition of a well-informed Jew, not of the Pharisaic
party, whose life experience was gained in Palestine in the first
half of the first century, and whose mother-tongue was Aramaic;
and that this conclusion alone explains the excellence of the
historical data and the philological phenomena of the book--
unless, indeed, with Burney, we must argue to a translation from
an Aramaic original.
"if the Syriac was the original, how does the same word, in the same context, in the same verse get transformed into two different words in the Greek translation?"
Sometimes the translator into Greek was confronted with an Aramaic word that had 2 meanings, both of which could plausibly have been intended. At that point, sometimes the translator into Greek made mention of both meanings in his translation. Other times, he selected an inferior meaning in preparing his translation-- he mistranslated.
=============================================.
Aramaic speakers to whom Revelation and Paul's epistles were written were widespread at the time, including in Greek cities.
"no one in Jesus' time/place spoke Syriac"
Not even Jesus? Not even the person who inscribed a 1st century A.D. burial box using Aramaic?
What Language Did Jesus Speak? - Mar 23, 2021; Mar 30, 2020
https://www.history.com/news/jesus-spoke-language
A first century A.D. burial box with an Aramaic inscription that reads "James, son of Joseph, brother of Jesus." Archeologists say this box possibly held the remains of James, the brother Jesus of Nazareth, dating back to 63 A.D.
...
"He spoke Aramaic, but he knew Hebrew," Netanyahu replied quickly.
Most religious scholars and historians agree with Pope Francis that the historical Jesus principally spoke a Galilean dialect of Aramaic. Through trade, invasions and conquest, the Aramaic language had spread far afield by the 7th century B.C., and would become the lingua franca in much of the Middle East.
In the first century A.D., it would have been the most commonly used language among ordinary Jewish people, as opposed to the religious elite, and the most likely to have been used among Jesus and his disciples in their daily lives.
===============================================
"Syriac is not the Aramaic of the first century"
What's the difference?
"the Greek Christians to whom Revelation were written didn't speak Aramaic or Syriac. They spoke Greek"
Evidence?
Do you agree with me that 'amen' and 'hallelujah' are used in Aramaic?
search for 'Hallelujah' at
https://biblescan.com/search.php?q=Hallelujah
Revelation 19:3 ... And again they shouted: "Hallelujah! The smoke from her goes up for ever and ever." And again their voices rang out: "Praise the LORD! ....
Revelation 19:6 ....like the roar of rushing waters and like loud peals of thunder, shouting: "Hallelujah! For our Lord God Almighty reigns. ....
Revelation 19:4 ....worshiped God, who was seated on the throne. And they cried: "Amen, Hallelujah!" ....
Revelation 19:1 ....I heard what sounded like the roar of a great multitude in heaven shouting: "Hallelujah! Salvation and glory and power belong to our God....
"you think a burial box proves what language Jesus spoke"
I don't think that.
"the Bible proves nothing about what language Jesus spoke"
Do you agree with me that "Talitha kum" is a transliteration of Aramaic?
Mark 5:41 (Amplified Bible), https://biblehub.com/mark/5-41.htm
Taking the child’s hand, He said [tenderly] to her, “Talitha kum!”—which translated [from Aramaic] means, “Little girl, I say to you, get up!”
"1) Aramaic made a revival as the Jews grew more intolerant of Roman occupation, after Jesus time, heading toward the rebellion of 70 AD, started in 67"
Reference for "Aramaic made a revival"?
"2) In formal and solemn cases, such as a burial box, people are less likely to use their common tongue and more like to use what they consider their native tongue"
What's the difference between "common tongue" and "native tongue"?
As which would you classify "Eli Eli lema sabachthani," which is Aramaic?
What Verses in the New Testament Are Aramaic? - Aug 2, 2019
https://bustedhalo.com/ministry-resource...re-aramaic
Talitha cum meaning “Little girl, get up!” (Mark 5:41)
Ephphatha meaning “Be opened.” (Mark 7:34)
Abba meaning “Father” (Mark 14:36)
Raca meaning “fool” (Matthew 5:22)
Rabbouni meaning “teacher” (John 20:16)
Eli Eli lema sabachthani meaning “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” (Matthew 27:46)
Hosanna meaning “O Lord, save us.” (Mark 11:9)
Maranatha meaning “Lord, come!” (1 Corinthians 16:22)
======================================================.
"if Rev 10:1 were translated from Aramaic, and if Aramaic uses the same word for either feet or legs, then Rev 10:1 would say, in Greek, 'legs like pillars of fire', not feet"
Do you agree with the Greek that there were 'feet like pillars of fire'?
"we have two choice, your argument that our Greek mss of Revelation are a result of an incompetent Greek translator. Or, Revelation was originally written in Greek and the author really meant feet"
The translator from Aramaic to Greek was largely competent. The book pronounces dire penalties for those who tamper with the text, and the translator tried mightily to do an accurate translation, even if that meant including grammatical monstrosities that conveyed information about the underlying Aramaic.
How do you account for the Greek Revelation's grammatical monstrosities?
Argument from bad Greek grammar in Revelation to it not being originally Greek
https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Aramaic_origi...ent_theory
Torrey opines that Revelation was originally in Aramaic, and points to grammatical monstrosities therein as evidence that it was not originally written in Greek:
For the Apocalyptist the language of the New Dispensation of the Christian Church was Aramaic only. It is most significant that the numerous hymns and doxologies sung or recited by the saints and angels in heaven, in chapter after chapter of the book, are composed in Aramaic (wherever it is possible to decide), not in Hebrew; though the writer could have used either language. ....
There is excellent reason, however, for one conclusion he [R.H. Charles] reaches—expressed in similar words by many before him—namely, that "the linguistic character of the Apocalypse is absolutely unique." The grammatical monstrosities of the book, in their number and variety and especially in their startling character, stand alone in the history of literature. It is only in the Greek that they are apparent, for it is the form, not the sense, that is affected. A few of the more striking solecisms are exhibited here in English translation, so that any reader may see their nature.
1:4. “Grace to you, and peace, from he who is and who was and who is to come” (all nom. case). 1:15. “His legs were like burnished brass (neut. gend., dative case) as in a furnace purified (fem. gend., sing. no., gen. case)” 11:3. “My witnesses (nom.) shall prophesy for many days clothed (accus.) in sackcloth.” 14:14. “I saw on the cloud one seated like unto a son-of-man (accus.), having (nom.) upon his head a golden crown.” 14:19. “He harvested the vintage of the earth, and cast it into the winepress (fem.), the great [winepress] (masc.) of the wrath of God.” 17:4. “A golden cup filled with abominations (gen.) and with unclean things (accus.).” 19:20. “The lake of blazing fire (“fire,” neut.; “blazing,” fem.). 20:2. “And he seized the dragon (accus.), the old serpent (nom.), who is the Devil and Satan and bound him.” 21:9. “Seven angels, holding the seven bowls (accus.) filled (gen.) with the seven last plagues.” 22:5. “They have no need of lamplight (gen.) nor of sunlight (accus.).”
This apparent linguistic anarchy has no explanation on the Greek side. It is hardly surprising that to some readers it should have seemed open defiance of grammar, to others a symptom of mental aberration. Nevertheless there is method to it all. The more grotesque these barbarisms, the more certain it is that they are not due to lack of acquaintance with Greek.[23]
===========================================.
"Looks to me like the angel in the vision had flaming feet, flames that formed a pillar"
So you think the flames formed a pillar, but not the feet. While the Greek text says 'feet like pillars of fire.' Got it.
"thinks the legs in the vision were on fire"
No, the legs were like pillars of fire.
"the Syriac text, made centuries later, says the same thing as the Greek text"
Not exactly. Translating from the Syriac, one can sensibly translate into English 'legs were like pillars of fire.' Translating from the Greek, one gets 'feet like pillars of fire.' You disagree with the Greek, and think not the feet, but rather the flames, were like pillars.
A particular Syriac word could be rendered: hand; arm.
Another Syriac word could be rendered: feet; legs.
In Revelation, a better rendering of a particular Syriac word is not 'feet,' but rather 'legs.' The translator into Greek chose the inferior rendering, because legs are like pillars, while feet aren't like pillars.
============================================.
"your arguments that the first-century Greek New Testament is a translation from the 7th-century Syriac"
That's not my argument. The Peshitta is far older than the 7th century.
"the Peshitta here also says the same thing as the Greek, that Jesus had 'breasts', in Rev 1:13"
So you agree with me that the Greek says Jesus had breasts.
Rather than using στῆθος/ stethos/ chest, the Greek mss. for Revelation 1:13 speak of Jesus having μαστός/ mastos/ breasts.
According to the Greek mss. of the NT, Jesus is headed to hellfire, had feet that were like pillars, and had breasts.
================================================.
"We're talking about the book of Revelation. That wasn't added to the Peshitta until the 7th century"
Reference? Technically, the Peshitt_a_ lacks Revelation. The Peshitt_o_ has Revelation. The Church of the East closed its canon before Revelation became widely regarded as worthy of being considered scripture.
"the Greek in Rev 1:13 is masculine, making it appropriate"
So making a word typically used for female breasts have a masculine gender, and using the word to describe Jesus, means it's OK to say Jesus had mastos?
"the Peshitta also says breasts here"
A precise language, Greek is the language of science and math with a large vocabulary. It has
στῆθος/ stethos/ chest, and it has μαστός/ mastos/ breasts. The Greek Revelation says Jesus has mastos/ breasts.
"Rev 15:6 uses your word for chest"
Rev 15:6
https://biblehub.com/interlinear/revelation/15-6.htm
4738 stēthē/ στήθη/ chests
"So, the author, or translator as you imagine, had that word in his vocabulary. He just chose not to use it in Rev 1:13" Do you have an explanation of that?
Do you agree with this statement?: "the description τοῖς μαστοῖς in Rev. 1 about Jesus would be surprising to a Greek reader, and μαστός is not used of men in LXX or NT"
https://bulletin.equinoxpub.com/2014/12/...n-breasts/
See: Jesse Rainbow, "Male μαστοί in Revelation 1.13." Journal for the Study of the New Testament 30.2 (2007): 249-253.
Aaron Christianson says: .... Fact Check!
μαστός is used of the male chest as well. Tragedies of Aescylus, Choephoroe, line 545.
LSJ'd! (and not to worry, I TLG'd it too!) Rainbow needs to be careful before he publishes something that can be refuted by checking the most popular Greek Lexicon in existence… and you should Check too! It's online, after all; no excuse not to check.
That's not to say Jesus doesn't have tits, but I don't think it's a clear teaching from this scripture. I guess we'll have to wait for his glorious appearing to find out.
....
Deane Galbraith says: ....
Hmmmmm… reading the article again, it seems that the author examines only LXX and NT usage of μαστός. Yet, he does make the more general statement that a reference to male breasts "is as striking in Greek as it is in the English", which implies a more general claim. Aeschylus is not contemporary Greek, but, you're right, I should've cross-checked against the usages.
....
Deane Galbraith says: ....
... ok, Aeschylus has καὶ μαστὸν ἀμφέχασκ᾽ ἐμὸν θρεπτήριον in Choephoroe, line 545: a nourishing breast for a baby! This is clearly a woman's breast; man-breasts do not ordinarily provide nourishment. Is this your example of a man-breast?
Yet LSJ doesn't actually cite Aeschylus as an example of the male application of μαστός, but cites Choephoroe, line 545 as a general instance of its use. For a man-breast, LSJ cites some other souces: "of men's breasts, "βάλε δουρὶ στέρνον ὑπὲρ μαζοῖο" [Il.]4.528; "βάλε στῆθος παρὰ μαζόν" 8.121, cf. Od.22.82 [μαζόν], X.An.1.4.17, 4.3.6 [both τῶν μαστῶν]." So, we have three from Homer, and two in Xenophon's Anabasis, and a total of 291 citations. From a quick survey, the mastoi seem to be overwhelmingly women's. Even the metaphorical usage refers to spherical or cup-like objects. I haven't looked at this in any detail, but Rainbow’s conclusion seems to be correct: the description τοῖς μαστοῖς in Rev. 1 about Jesus would be surprising to a Greek reader, and μαστός is not used of men in LXX or NT.
Do you have an explanation of the Greek Revelation's grammatical monstrosities?
Argument from bad Greek grammar in Revelation to it not being originally Greek
https://wikipedia.org/wiki/Aramaic_origi...ent_theory
Torrey opines that Revelation was originally in Aramaic, and points to grammatical monstrosities therein as evidence that it was not originally written in Greek:
For the Apocalyptist the language of the New Dispensation of the Christian Church was Aramaic only. It is most significant that the numerous hymns and doxologies sung or recited by the saints and angels in heaven, in chapter after chapter of the book, are composed in Aramaic (wherever it is possible to decide), not in Hebrew; though the writer could have used either language. ....
There is excellent reason, however, for one conclusion he [R.H. Charles] reaches—expressed in similar words by many before him—namely, that "the linguistic character of the Apocalypse is absolutely unique." The grammatical monstrosities of the book, in their number and variety and especially in their startling character, stand alone in the history of literature. It is only in the Greek that they are apparent, for it is the form, not the sense, that is affected. A few of the more striking solecisms are exhibited here in English translation, so that any reader may see their nature.
1:4. “Grace to you, and peace, from he who is and who was and who is to come” (all nom. case). 1:15. “His legs were like burnished brass (neut. gend., dative case) as in a furnace purified (fem. gend., sing. no., gen. case)” 11:3. “My witnesses (nom.) shall prophesy for many days clothed (accus.) in sackcloth.” 14:14. “I saw on the cloud one seated like unto a son-of-man (accus.), having (nom.) upon his head a golden crown.” 14:19. “He harvested the vintage of the earth, and cast it into the winepress (fem.), the great [winepress] (masc.) of the wrath of God.” 17:4. “A golden cup filled with abominations (gen.) and with unclean things (accus.).” 19:20. “The lake of blazing fire (“fire,” neut.; “blazing,” fem.). 20:2. “And he seized the dragon (accus.), the old serpent (nom.), who is the Devil and Satan and bound him.” 21:9. “Seven angels, holding the seven bowls (accus.) filled (gen.) with the seven last plagues.” 22:5. “They have no need of lamplight (gen.) nor of sunlight (accus.).”
This apparent linguistic anarchy has no explanation on the Greek side. It is hardly surprising that to some readers it should have seemed open defiance of grammar, to others a symptom of mental aberration. Nevertheless there is method to it all. The more grotesque these barbarisms, the more certain it is that they are not due to lack of acquaintance with Greek.[23]
====================================================.
"Alexander the Great had Hellenized his kingdom, thus they all spoke Greek in addition to their native language. Thus the Jewish people spoke their language plus Greek"
Reference that "the Jewish people spoke their language plus Greek"?
Josephus, _Antiquities of the Jews_, XX, XI
I have also taken a great deal of pains to obtain the learning of the Greeks, and understand the elements of the Greek language … [yet] I cannot pronounce Greek with sufficient exactness; for our nation does NOT encourage those that learn the languages of many nations … because they [the Jews] look upon this sort of accomplishment as common [very lowly] … But they give him the testimony of being a wise man who is fully acquainted with our [Jewish] laws … [in contrast] as there have been many who have done their endeavors with great patience to obtain this [Greek] learning, there have yet hardly been so many as two or three that have succeeded therein, who were immediately well rewarded for their pains -- emphases added as cited in
25 Irrefutable Reasons Why the New Testament Was NOT Originally Written in Greek
https://www.biblicaltruths.com/25-irrefu...-in-greek/
"What good would it have done to write to the Roman, Corinthian, Ephesian, and other churches in Aramaic if they were pagans?"
Are you saying the Pauline epistles were written to pagans?
"No one would understand it"
Aramaic speakers were located in those cities. Paul's letters were written in Paul's native tongue-- Aramaic-- and translated into Greek, and circulated in Aramaic and Greek.
================================================.
"Wikipedia is not a real, legitimate, or scholarly acceptable source"
Is Torrey's _The Apocalypse of John: Introduction, Excerpts, and a New Translation_ (Yale University Press, 1958) a "real, legitimate, ... scholarly acceptable source"?
What's your explanation for the atrocious Greek grammar in the Greek Revelation?